Shadowbot3 (talk | contribs) m Automated archival of 6 sections to User talk:TJ Spyke/Archive 14 |
Comment |
||
Line 247: | Line 247: | ||
== Cardinals proposal == |
== Cardinals proposal == |
||
It was silly of me to set up two surveys & discussions. Is ok with you if I delete both our votes at [[Talk:Cardinal]], & just link to the other survey? [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] 23:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
It was silly of me to set up two surveys & discussions. Is ok with you if I delete both our votes at [[Talk:Cardinal]], & just link to the other survey? [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] 23:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC) |
||
==Comment== |
|||
Calling me stubborn, as well as your false claims here: [[User_talk:Neo_Samus#VC_11.2F19]]. You need to work on articles, instead of attacking me and just assuming bad faith. You say I'm harassing you, but you are the one that is more to blame here. You need to just leave me the hell alone, and stop talking about me on talk pages just to make me look bad. Wikipedia is for editing and discussing articles, not bashing and insulting others. [[User:RobJ1981|RobJ1981]] 00:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:13, 3 December 2007
most watched match on Wrestlemania III page
quite new to Wikipedia here so still a bit shaky with the edit process and what not - but check the Dick Beyer (aka The Destroyer) page here which lists 70 million TV viewers for his match with Rikidozan in 1963. it's on any number of messageboards and whatnot as well, unfortunately there aren't too many pages around that cater to actual wrestling historians...but do your research, google around, and you'll see. It's actually disputed among historians as to whether the Thesz/Rikidozan match or the Destroyer/Rikidozan match is the most watched - Thesz match had a higher audience percentage rating (89.0 rating!) but the Destroyer match a few years later took place when there were more television sets. one link claiming the Destroyer match is the most watched of all time is [1] Either way they both outdo The Main Event Hogan/Andre by a significant margin. LunaSlave (talk) 12:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles | WikiWorld comic: "Cursive" |
News and notes: Ombudsman commission, fundraiser, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
WikiProject Report: Education in Australia | Features and admins |
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:43, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
most TV viewers for a wrestling match
I see that LunaSlave has already gotten to you, but I wanted to respond as well. I won't change the WrestleMania III page, because I've seen how the people there dislike Meltzer, but here is a quote & source for the most watched wrestling match:
From Dave Meltzer's Tributes II, p. 228, talking about 10/7/57's Lou Thesz v. Rikidozan match:
"More importantly, everyone in the country watched the match on television. The company that was handling ratings at the time measured it as an 87.5 rating, making it, by far, the highest-rated television show ever in Japan, and blowing away any television show in history ever in the United States."
So, you're from Rochester too, huh? What do you think the chances are that we can get ROH to put on a show here?
Thanks! MookieZ (talk) 14:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Reply
I have no idea. I just added a quickee rationale so the image wouldn't be immediately deleted. I figured a source could be added later. -- Scorpion0422 16:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
WrestleMania 23 and talk page archives
It went 2 days without that section and no one re-added it back. Seeing as you are the only one re-adding it, people don't care. Stop thinking you own the article, and leave it be. Also, talk page archives are to be left alone and not edited. Don't fix spelling mistakes or other errors in them. RobJ1981 (talk) 19:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- RJ, fixing spelling mistakes is not a big deal; archives aren't strictly off-limits. Also, TJ's right about a consensus on the WM 23 article. That was a comparatively large dispute at the time, so it cannot simply be overruled by you. if you want a new discussion, then that's fine, but reverting and declaring it useless simply can't cut it. The Hybrid T/C 22:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Royal Rumble
I never added that it was from WWE.com, someone else must have edited it. Vinyldestination (talk)
Za
Uh, because za is the Japanese transliteration for "the" into their language. If the title was actually "Mario & Sonic at the Beijing Olympics", then the original title would be マリオ&ソニック AT ザ北京オリンピック. However, the actual title doesn't have ザ, so a straight translation shouldn't have the "the". ' 04:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help!
Thank You for the help on the No Way Out (2004) article, as I am busy with that and the List of WWE Hardcore Champions article.--TrUcO9311 (talk) 22:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
List of WWE PPV's
I have NO idea how to make a citation, even with reading that. Can you do it for me? It's a special calendar insert that comes in the special WWE Magazine entitiled "The Greatest Moments in Pay-Per-View history". I just can't make heads or tails of the WP: CITE thing you gave me. WestJet (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
So should I put all the PPV's into 1 sortable table, or break it into sections (and if so how? i.e. like by promotion or "current" and "former".--TrUcO9311 (talk) 22:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, that will look so great. Well are we going to include Ring of Honor? If so may you locate them for me. =]TrUcO9311 (talk) 23:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- So when you say include them with the others you mean like creathing another section entitled "Other Promotions", and the make a table there?--TrUcO9311 (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Ok now for the refs, what kind of references do I add, like ones that prove the event was/is real?--TrUcO9311 (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- So does it look gud? (already know about the misspelled word)--TrUcO9311 (talk) 00:47, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. Its done NOW!..Just need refs but go check it out!TrUcO9311 (talk) 01:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Re:Image question
I have re-added the missing fair use rationale tag. I also left a note on his talk page, so hopefully, he'll heed my advice. Nishkid64 (talk) 02:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Dec. 3 deletion
RobJ deleted the Dec. 3 info. I think he's gonna keep a very close eye on the talk page, so I'm not sure we can post info anymore. Is there any way to prove him that those will be the games. Oh, he also said that this is not a fansite. Neo Samus 22:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't bother trying to talk him out of his "policy nazi" mode. Rob's a stubborn guy, and even if these games do come out on Monday, there's no real way of proving that our source didn't just get lucky at guessing. Again. Can I just have a link to the place you get this information, TJ? That way I won't have to rely on the talk page anymore. Thanks in advance! -Thores 23:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- [2]. Neo, i'm not sure if Rob will ever admit he is wrong (he is very stubborn and doesn't back down unles there is an overwhelming consensus against him). TJ Spyke 00:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Even when there is an overwhelming consensus against him its never stopped him. Sigh. Well if anything we'll hold off posting about dec. 3 and just wait till next week. Neo Samus 01:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC) EDIT: Never mind. You posted it again. LOL!
- I've already said that I was a bit annoyed at having that on the talk page, even if we have a lot of reason to believe that it's true. I actually really like the information, I only want to be careful. I know Rob is a pain. We've had tons of problems with Rob. And he sure knows how to quote policy, but not how to follow it. --LN3000 04:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- The December 3 section doesn't belong, as it's speculation from an unreliable source. Stop re-adding it. As for the rude comments: knock it off. Comment about the article, not editors. This behaviour isn't needed. RobJ1981 23:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Even when there is an overwhelming consensus against him its never stopped him. Sigh. Well if anything we'll hold off posting about dec. 3 and just wait till next week. Neo Samus 01:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC) EDIT: Never mind. You posted it again. LOL!
WP:PW newsletter
The newsletter is ready for proofreading. We are likely not to have any current events this week. The Chronic 00:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter
Wrestlemania X8
Hmmm... the link must not be working well now... try doing a "Wayback Machine" search on www.wrestlemania.com and click on any of the dates after March 18, 2002. Then look through the Resuslts and see that they call him Hollywood Hulk Hogan, not just Hulk Hogan. Here's the link for the search: [3]
And here's the link for the Rock/Hogan match result in case it works now: [4] (Hopefully it will.) --Andresg770 23:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Cardinals proposal
It was silly of me to set up two surveys & discussions. Is ok with you if I delete both our votes at Talk:Cardinal, & just link to the other survey? Johnbod 23:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment
Calling me stubborn, as well as your false claims here: User_talk:Neo_Samus#VC_11.2F19. You need to work on articles, instead of attacking me and just assuming bad faith. You say I'm harassing you, but you are the one that is more to blame here. You need to just leave me the hell alone, and stop talking about me on talk pages just to make me look bad. Wikipedia is for editing and discussing articles, not bashing and insulting others. RobJ1981 00:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)