Gavyn Sykes (talk | contribs) m →Wikilinks: Indent fix. |
Warning: Potentially violating the three revert rule on No Way Out (2008). using TW |
||
Line 149: | Line 149: | ||
==Wikilinks== |
==Wikilinks== |
||
Two links in the same section of the same article to another article is considered redundant. This situation would be like having links to [[Ric Flair]] every time his name appears in the [[Evolution (professional wrestling)|Evolution]] article. [[User:Gavyn Sykes|Gavyn Sykes]] ([[User talk:Gavyn Sykes|talk]]) 23:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC) |
Two links in the same section of the same article to another article is considered redundant. This situation would be like having links to [[Ric Flair]] every time his name appears in the [[Evolution (professional wrestling)|Evolution]] article. [[User:Gavyn Sykes|Gavyn Sykes]] ([[User talk:Gavyn Sykes|talk]]) 23:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|30px|]] You currently appear to be engaged in an [[Wikipedia:Edit war|edit war]]{{#if:No Way Out (2008)|  according to the reverts you have made on [[:No Way Out (2008)]]}}. Note that the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. If you continue, '''you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] among editors. If necessary, pursue [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> '''''[[User:Truco9311|<font color="black">T</font><font color="blue">r</font><font color="black">U</font>]][[User talk:Truco9311|<font color="blue">C</font><font color="Black">o</font>]][[User:Truco9311/Guestbook|<sup><font color="black">9</font></sup><small><font color="blue">31</font></small><sup><font color="black">1</font></sup>]]''''' 03:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:35, 17 February 2008
WWE Armageddon
I don't know if I will revert it yet, but it HAS to be sourced. Don't claim you don't know how since I said how to do so in my edit summary. Also, the practice here is to wait for the US airing. TJ Spyke 23:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Your edits to Royal Rumble (2008)
Why do you keep changing the title of the reference to the wrong name? The "Title" is supposed to be what the title of th source is. If you check the source, it cleary says the title is "Preview: The Royal Rumble match". Also, we don't list nicknames in PPV's (one of the few exceptions being when we list the WWE Hall of Fame inductees at WrestleMania), so it should just be "Jim Duggan". TJ Spyke 04:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Understood. GuffasBorgz7 15:41, 3 January 2008 (EDST)
- Your edits come in conflict with our project's policy of "Week-by-Week" commentary. Unless notable (decided by consensus) it cannot be added to the article. Hope that clarifies.-- bulletproof 3:16 04:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Understood. GuffasBorgz7 15:58, 4 January 2008 (EDST)
- You're doing this on purpose, aren't you? You and I both know that the match was announced on SmackDown. I did provide a source though, see Template:Cite episode. TJ Spyke 03:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Understood. GuffasBorgz7 15:58, 4 January 2008 (EDST)
- You mean I added the source for the WHC, you didn't. TJ Spyke 03:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Your edits come in conflict with our project's policy of "Week-by-Week" commentary. Unless notable (decided by consensus) it cannot be added to the article. Hope that clarifies.-- bulletproof 3:16 04:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- Is there a particular edit summary you are referring to? Words in grey means appear automatically when you are editing a specific section of the page (rather than just clicking the "Edit this page" tab). TJ Spyke 05:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Take a look at Royal Rumble (2003) and Royal Rumble (2004). Both of those we list the event that the qualification match took place at. Is there a particular reason not to do the same for 2008? TJ Spyke 08:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- If WWE acknowledges that Snitsky is in the RR match, then we can add that it was at a house show. TJ Spyke 21:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- There are some exceptions, like when iN DEMAND showed the poster for Royal Rumble (the first site with it) and advertised a Elimination Chamber match for NWO. TJ Spyke —Preceding comment was added at 00:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- This has been discussed at WP:PW and no real consensus made. I suppose if several seperate websites (i.e. no "as reported on so-and-so site" since that would just be reporting what some other site said) report what happens at a house show, I guess that could be acceptable. It's a judgment call, whether we list him or not doesn't matter to me. TJ Spyke 00:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- If WWE acknowledges that Snitsky is in the RR match, then we can add that it was at a house show. TJ Spyke 21:41, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- Take a look at Royal Rumble (2003) and Royal Rumble (2004). Both of those we list the event that the qualification match took place at. Is there a particular reason not to do the same for 2008? TJ Spyke 08:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
- [1][2] Please stop. Your edits are becoming very disruptive. We at WP:PW are trying to expand PPV articles, so your edits do not help. Please see this page for more information. D.M.N. (talk) 12:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Power 25 pages
The Power 25 pages were redirected as non-notable list cruft per consensus at WP:PW. Please do not recreate them as the will be either redirected again or nominated for deletion. Thank you. -- bulletproof 3:16 04:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's not the case. The issue here is that it was agreed by the project to redirect or delete the pages. If you want to try and change the consensus I suggest you discuss this at WP:PW's talk page. -- bulletproof 3:16 05:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
No Way Out 2008
Spoiler reports are NOT reliable sources since, among other reasons, there is no way to verify if the info is correct (even the sites that post them can't verify, they have to trust that the people sending them in are telling the truth). Wait until matches are announced on a reliable source (most likely when SmackDown airs, or on wwe.com). TJ Spyke 03:14, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Why call it that? EC is just a type of match. If they were having two ladder matches, we wouldn't say "RAW ladder match" and "SmackDown ladder match". TJ Spyke 03:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- It was decided long ago that we would distinguish brand matches (hence why the 2002 PPVs don't feature "Raw match" or "SmackDown match", or why we don't list WWF wrestlers and WCW/ECW wrestlers for the Invasion PPV). If you want to see if the consensus has changed at WP:PW you can, but the current consensus is that identifying matches by brand is something we don't do. TJ Spyke 03:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
- Um, just so you know, changing the date listed in the template doesn't do anything. You can change the date that appears in it, but only an admin can change the actual amount of time the protection lasts. Februay 18 was picked because vandalism by IPs/new users on PPV articles last up to the event and heavily during the event itself, the vandalism usually stops after the event, that's why we pick the day after the PPV when requesting protection for a PPV article. TJ Spyke 07:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
February 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on No Way Out (2008). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. This has been discussed at WT:PW the name of the WWE brand is called RAW', the name of the WWE TV Show is Raw. TrUCo9311 22:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes but Raw, SmackDown!, and ECW are shows of WWE. And Raw is the name of the show not the brand, but either way is correct as some other user corrected me. Cheers.--TrUCo9311 22:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- "Mate"? You from Australia? Yeah but the name of the show is Raw, but WWE trademarks/promotes it as RAW, it's in the article WWE Raw.TrUCo9311 22:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- Read Gavyn's comment, that would be unencyclopedic, just because it's not on WWE.com doesnt mean anything because it has aired already. And because other English countries use the English Wikipedia, it is official. But to prevent an Edit war I will leave it alone.TrUCo9311 23:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Australian TV is a reliable source
Anyone claiming otherwise is simply incorrect and going against every debate to do with spoilers. Wikipedia both allows and activey encourages spoilers, but once a show has aired in one part of the world it is not longer a spoiler and is in the public domain itself as a reliable source.
This comment from Tony Sidaway pretty much summarises the facts:
- Once episodes of a TV program are broadcast on a public network, the events depicted are in the public domain. To embargo comment on those episodes until they are broadcast in one particular country is out of the question. Utterly unacceptable. Moreover, should a wrestling bout take place in public arenas, clubs and the like before members of the public, there can be no embargo on any reliable reportage of the bout, in any form. As long as the source is reliable (for instance, ESPN, CNN or BBC reports the result of the bout) no embargo can apply on Wikipedia, and no decision made here can override that fact.
If you would to see more on when the Australian airing, among other spoiler discussions, resulted in agreement that they are both reliable and must be included see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 35. Anyone claiming a "consensus" on spoilers not being allowed and the Australian airing being unreliable is both incorrect in policy and the result of the actual debate possibly attempting to commit argumentum ad nauseum. –– Lid(Talk) 01:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter
Previous Issue | The Wikipedia: WikiProject Professional Wrestling Newsletter | Next Issue |
---|
Signature
User:3bulletproof16 designed my current sig, try asking him. TJ Spyke 23:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'd be more than happy to design one for you. Just give me some ideas on what you want.-- bulletproof 3:16 06:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well I couldn't get every other letter "black/blue" like you wanted because it would have been too long to fit in the "Signature" box on your Preferences page. However, I did take the color scheme you gave me and incorporated it into this ... -GuffasBorgz7- ("Guffas" links to your user page and "Borgz7" links to this talk page) It's just a "Prototype" or if you like it the way it is, go right ahead and use it. If you want me to change something, please tell me. -- bulletproof 3:16 05:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Easy, just copy this...
- '''<sup><u>-G</u>[[User:GuffasBorgz7|<u><span style="color:#00008B">uf<span style="color:#0000FF">fa</span>s</span></u>]][[User talk:GuffasBorgz7|<u><span style="color:#00008B">B<span style="color:#0000FF">or</span>gz</span></u>]]<u>7-</u></sup>'''
- Then go to "my preferences" on the top menu (next to "my watchlist") and find the field that says "Signature:" and paste it there. Finally, make sure the "Raw signature" box is checked and then click "save". Cheers!-- bulletproof 3:16 07:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Nope, sorry. See Wikipedia:Signatures#Appearance and color. You didn't want your sig in bold? You forgot to copy the three apostrophes on each end of the sig formula.-- bulletproof 3:16 07:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Then go to "my preferences" on the top menu (next to "my watchlist") and find the field that says "Signature:" and paste it there. Finally, make sure the "Raw signature" box is checked and then click "save". Cheers!-- bulletproof 3:16 07:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sure, no prob. Cheers!-- bulletproof 3:16 07:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
NWO
Actually, support seems about even (not a majority supporting redundant info). TJ Spyke 05:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikilinks
Two links in the same section of the same article to another article is considered redundant. This situation would be like having links to Ric Flair every time his name appears in the Evolution article. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 23:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on No Way Out (2008). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. TrUCo9311 03:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)