User talk:Vjmlhds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

FYI[edit]

I have filed a DRN case at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Donald_Trump - please add your summary of the dispute there. Thanks! Twitbookspacetube (talk) 00:32, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]

Peacedove.svg

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! --Twitbookspacetube (talk) 00:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Reminder of ArbCom remedies at Donald Trump[edit]

Hello. You have added the same image to Donald Trump at least 3 times: on 22 December, on 25 December, and on 20 January. Obviously this means it was removed at least twice. If you refer to the WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES near the top of that article's talk page, the first bullet says, "Consensus required: All editors must obtain consensus on the talk page of this article before reinstating any edits that have been challenged (via reversion). If in doubt, don't make the edit." Your edit has been challenged, so you must get talk page consensus for it before reinstating it. Please remove the image. Thank you. ―Mandruss  21:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I have removed the image. ―Mandruss  13:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Rumor[edit]

Hi. About the WON source... WON is consider a reliable source by the project. However, we don't accept rumor nor expeculations. The source says the card it's just a rumor. Isn't reliable. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:23, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WWE HOF logo.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WWE HOF logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:49, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:NXT San Antonio.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NXT San Antonio.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Rollins injury[edit]

As I told you... the roster page should reflect the current state of WWE. Right now, Rollins is inactive due to an injury. No matter the time (8 weeks aprox) he will be inactive. please, don't remove that. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:40, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

UK Championship[edit]

Although it is gonna be temporarily defended on NXT, it is not an NXT title and should not be categorized as such. If you look at WWE.com, they do not categorize it as an NXT title, and neither should we. As I said in one of my edit summaries, we can mention that it's temporarily being defended on NXT in the meantime, but we shouldn't say it's an NXT title when it's not (unless WWE decides to say otherwise). --JDC808 05:42, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

So you just ignore this post and issue me a warning for disruptive editing? If anything, you are being disruptive for providing information that sources DO NOT back. Again, IT IS NOT an NXT title. Just because it is temporarily being defended there does not make it an NXT title. Unless you can provide actual sources that says it is an NXT title, stop classifying it as one. --JDC808 21:50, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
JDC808 I'm not seeing why you are blowing such a gasket...I've always pointed out that the UK Title is being defended in NXT in an interim basis, as the title was designed specifically for the new UK brand, which has been documented. All I have ever maintained was that the UK Title is currently seen on NXT. The UK wrestlers are working NXT to get some work in before their own brand gets up and running. You need to not get so hung up on this "belongs to" idea. All due respect, you're splitting hairs on this idea of it being an "NXT Title". Since there is no functioning UK brand at the moment, the title is "crashing" at Full Sail until it can "get it's own place". Vjmlhds (talk) 03:23, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't see why you're so insistent on listing it under NXT. You can say that it's being defended there in the interim. That's not a problem. But you're also listing it as an NXT title. That's the issue. It should not be listed as an NXT title the way that you're doing it because that's false information that no reliable source backs, nor does WWE.com. You are listing it under NXT in the template, you are listing it under NXT for current championships, and you are listing it as the brand on the article itself (interim doesn't cut it and the brand should just be left blank until the UK brand is established). --JDC808 10:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
So...no refute? Can't really establish consensus that way... --JDC808 02:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
JDC808 You're persistent, I'll give you that. At the end of the day, all titles belong to WWE, and they get defended on whatever brand WWE assigns them to. At the current time, WWE assigned the UK Title to NXT until they can get their own brand running - it's as simple as that. Gotta get it out of your head that the title "belongs" to NXT...never said it did, just that that's where it is being featured these days until the UK brand starts up. It has to go somewhere. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:24, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
"WWE assigned the UK Title to NXT" - aside from a title defense there, there's no source that actually says the UK title has been assigned to NXT. That's the entire basis of my argument. I know it doesn't belong to NXT, but the fact is, where you're listing it, that's how it appears and that's an issue for unfamiliar readers. --JDC808 04:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
JDC808 Now you're just getting hung up over minutiae. And don't assume anything about other readers. Vjmlhds 04:59, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────It's not an assumption, it's the fact of how we're presenting the information. If you can provide me a source that says the UK title is assigned, or whatever word you want to use, to NXT, then I'll concede. Until then, the way it's currently presented is wrong. Also, I have dealt with a number of unfamiliar readers to a topic and yes, they can easily get confused on something like that. --JDC808 05:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

JDC808 This discussion looks like the one you are having on your own talk page with the Show vs Shaq match at WrestleMania. WWE has made it plain that the UK title is being defended on NXT this week, and that the UK wrestlers are working in NXT for the time being. It's almost like anything short of Vince McMahon coming out with stone tablets isn't gonna cut it with you. The way I have it laid out is correct based on how things are currently structured. It's public record the UK Title was created for it's own brand, but until that brand gets established, the belt has to go somewhere, and that somewhere (as of now) is NXT. All of your arguments are really just nitpicking when you get right down to it. Vjmlhds 06:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
You can call it nitpicking. I call it providing factual information that is supported by sources. I'll say it again, I have no problem with mentioning that it's temporarily being defended on NXT. My problem is how it's being listed under NXT. You claim it has to go somewhere. Why is that? Why can't the brand on the UK title page be left blank until the UK brand is established? Why can't it be listed as TBD in the template, when that is more accurate than listing it under NXT? This is similar to that other discussion because just like there, the sources do not support it. You're basically going against policies as you're listing something that sources do not support. Not sure what's hard to understand about that. --JDC808 07:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Donald Trump[edit]

Please don't add alternative facts about Donald Trump as you did in executive producer. Thanks, Lyrda (talk) 18:24, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Lydra No alternative anything here..this was actually a big story when it first came to light. Turns out to be much ado about nothing, but the 45th president's name does indeed appear in the credits of the show. Vjmlhds 19:55, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
The article is about executive producers, As you can see here, he is credited as such only for specific episodes. Lyrda (talk) 20:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Note furthermore that in the source you added, Trump in fact confirms his involvement as EP: "I conceived it with Mark B & have a big stake in it." So, this is not an example of credits erroneously continued - which rarely happens and is not in any way relevant to this article - but rather of Trump being confused about what an EP does. Lyrda (talk) 20:27, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Other on air personnel[edit]

Hi. I say this one more time. I don't undertsand why do you talk about Other on air personnel section as Not part of the Main Roster. Shane McMahon is not a wrestler, he is an Authority Figure. Sometimes he had a match, but even the reports call him a non-wrestler (http://www.pwinsider.com/article/100864/what-they-could-do-to-make-taker-vs-shane-more-believable-from-a-competition-standpoint-vince-relying-on-family-who-to-hire-to-run-your-wrestling-company-if-you-are-rich-and-more.html?p). I don't really like your idea about "WM season, move Authority figures to Wrestling section" because a lot of not wrestlers had matches in WWE (Eric Bischoff, Jim Ross, Paul Heyman, Lana, john Laurinaitis...). Like Stephanie, you're talking about Other on air personnel as an embarrasing section. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

HHH Pedrigree Shane wrestles in big matches and does crazy stunts...it's what he does, and that's why he was brought back. Shane is more along the lines of HHH than Stephanie. The 2 men save their bullets for big matches, and Stephanie hasn't even wrestled in nearly 3 years. Not all "other personnel" are created equal - can't just put them all into one pot, as clearly there are major differences in how and why they're used. Vjmlhds 16:27, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Please, stop. All of this is your non-neutral POV. You decided to give HHH and Shane an special treatment just because "he wrestled big matches". It doesn't matter, Shane is a non-wrestler, an authority figure. I don't see the point to change their section just because WM. Yes, Shane is equal to Foley, Lana or Heyman. Also, Shane wrestling at WM IT'S A RUMOR. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:48, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
HHH Pedrigree Actually it does matter...Shane McMahon had his face on the front of Dallas Cowboys Stadium last year promoting his WM 32 match with Undertaker (don't remember seeing Heyman or Lana up there) "Non-wrestlers" don't get their face front and center on a 100,000 seat stadium. This is the clearest example to show that WWE sees Shane as an attraction - not just "other personnel" Vjmlhds (talk) 18:51, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Again, it's your personal POV. You are talking about wrestlers section = big attracion. It doesn't matter shane appears in trucks, posters... he is not a wrestler. You put him in a wrong section just because "wwe think he is an attraction". A non wrestler is an attraction too. Im serious, im the second user who undid your edition.
The point is you are talking about wrestlers section as a Big Attraction section and you are wrong. Wrestler section is for wrestlers: Seth Rollins, Roman Reigns, Jinder Mahal. Shane McMahon is a big attraction, but he isn't a wrestler. Even when he had his WM Match against Taker, PWInsider called him a non-wrestler. How WWE used him it's not our bussines, Shane is a non wrestler who occasionaly had a match (like Michael Cole, Jerry Lawler, Paul Heyman). BTW, the Shane McMahon WM match it's just a rumor. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
HHH Pedrigree Do you even know what a "big attraction" is? That is someone you are willing to pay big money to see. People don't pay to see Paul Heyman stand in the corner...they pay to see Shane McMahon jump off 20 foot Hell in a Cells and crash through tables. That's why Shane has his face on stadiums. Shane is very much a wrestler...PWInsider can say what they want, that is their OPINION...it doesn't mean it is gospel. And comparing what he does to Cole or Heyman is a joke...you do realize Shane has been wrestling (on and off) for nearly 20 years now and even held 2 titles (Euro, Hardcore). Step outside and smell the flowers. My God, man...wake up and join the real world. Vjmlhds (talk) 00:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── HHH Pedrigree I'm dropping it, OK...no need for such drastic measures on your part...not worth the hassle. Vjmlhds 13:34, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Timken Ohio GOP.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:Timken Ohio GOP.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted content borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Train2104 (t • c) 01:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:RRM GOP 2017.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on File:RRM GOP 2017.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted content borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Train2104 (t • c) 01:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)