Talk:Mark (professional wrestling)

Terribly inaccurate
THe term Mark refers to ANY wrestling fan. Although it is usually use negativly, it can refer to anyone who is a fan, regardless of whether they think it's real or not.--Unopeneddoor 20:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but you are totally wrong. See smark.  Also, see .  Hybrid 09:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * A smark is still a mark. The term means "smart mark". THe term is not used in the wrestling industry and is seen as idiotic. I used to work in wrestling, I've never met anyone in the industry who used the term smark with anything but disdain or refered to any fan as anything but a mark.--Unopeneddoor 21:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The IWC uses the word smark. Anyway, mark used to refere to any wrestling fan, but eventually the term smark grew to equal the term mark, and that is where we are today. Plus, try calling a smark a mark to their face and see what happens ;). The   Hybrid  05:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I do. If they are insulted by it they're an idiot 99/100
 * Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Eother way, I think that we should comprimise. Say that some people see smarks as a type of mark, and others see them a completely separate section of the fans. Lets not argue for either side in the article, because this isn't an article about the differences between (s)marks. If you think this is a good idea, go for it; otherwise, say what you don't like about it and we can continue the discussion. Cheers The   Hybrid  22:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

WWE
Far from playing to the marks, it is more arugable that the WWE ignores them and is aimed solely at smarks and smarts, especially since the name change (even though it grew out of a lawsuit from the World Wildlife Federation) to "Entertainment" and McMahon's known desire not to have to have real ambulances, etc., on site at all matches as would be required by state athletic commissions and insurers if matches were "real", and his overall desire not to be regulated or bothered by state athletic commissions at all. All of the current WWE peformers now readily admit that there are theatical elements to the storyline, that there are differences between their real persona and their gimmicks, and generally break kayfabe, and argue that the entertainment experience is better as a result, as selling moves and suspension of disbelief required represents a higher level of talent than previously required when kayfabe was not publicly broken. To be a "mark" in the traditional with regard to the WWE would require one to be extremely young and naive or just willingly to blind oneself to how the WWE now openly operates. Perhaps traditional marks may exist in the followings of some indy promotions or some non-U.S. promotions, but to say that WWE is currently (2006) aimed at marks seems to be, well, off the mark. Rlquall 15:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * That is very true. Hybrid 06:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see how a "devoted fan" can be a mark. I mean, can't fans be fans anymore? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dark Rain (talk • contribs).
 * I see where you are coming from, and how you could have missed this. Everyone who enjoys wrestling is called a wrestling fan.  Marks and Smarks are the two types of wrestling fan.  We tend to identify ourselves as one or the other because we typically hate the other kind of fan.  I am a smark, I hate marks, and they hate me; its a hate-hate relationship.  Also, being a devoted fan doesn't make you a mark, thinking wrestling is real makes you a mark.  The main point you were supossed to get from that sentence in the article was that marks tend to be young and naïve.  That is basically what the (s)mark thing is about.  P.S. Please sign your comments.  Hybrid 09:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)