Talk:No Way Out (2008)/Archive 1

lost wrestlemania title shot?
does this match orton vs cena mean cena gave in his title shot?Black6989 (talk) 02:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Black6989

Yes, Cena decided to use his Royal Rumble title shot at No Way Out instead of Wrestlemania XXIV. So, now the Elimination Chamber will decide the number 1 contender for the WWE Championship at Wrestlemania XXIV. Milkman519 (talk) 02:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks. im watching it on sky plus toavois the adverts and asked the question. staright after the break i got my answer. yhanks though manBlack6989 (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)Black6989

ok, i'm a new user so i can't edit the article i have a source that told me that at the SD! tapping on Tuesday January 29, 2008 two more matches were confirmed: The World Heavyweight championship will be on the line when Edge defends vs. Rey Mysterio as well as a SD! elimination chamber #1 contender's match with undertaker vs. batista vs. big daddy v vs. mvp vs. finlay vs. the great khali

so whoever can actually edit this articel will you please enter this information —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zack91193 (talk • contribs)
 * Thanks, and all but Wikipedia is not the place to add spoilers. T r U C o 9 31 1 03:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

o my bad i was jus trying to help out —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zack91193 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia's guidelines state that all sources must be verifiable. Thus, your source, unless reputable and easily accessed by others, cannot be trusted. This is not to say, however, that it may or may not be untrue, just unverifiable. Therefore, we should wait until WWE.com is updated with new information before adding it here. Many thanks anyway. &lt;font color=#777700&gt;Lemon&lt;/font&gt; &lt;font color=#990000&gt;Demon&lt;/font&gt; (talk) 13:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Official Theme Song
Althought we should wait until it is listed on wwe.com's No Way Out homepage, the theme song for No Way Out looks like its going to be "Fake It" by Seether, judging by its use in the promo for the Elimination Chamber. JediYoda1120 (talk) 03:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Smackdown No Way Out
in aus we get smackdown on friday here (Friday in aus = Thursday in the states) and teddy long announsed a elimanation chamber with, finaly, batista, khali, big daddy V, MVP and the undertaker. so there is 2 elimanation chambers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foylepher (talk • contribs) 05:40, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * 1. Please Sign Your Comments 2. Matches are not added until announced on WWE.com. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 06:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough we have been over the australia US thing and yes he should sign his comment but no we don't wait till its on wwe.com we wait till we have a reliable source. for this exact article we had that no way out would have an elimination chamber as it was advertised on the tickets etc. not on wwe.com but i was allowed as we had a reliable source. so hence say this guy had recorded teddy long annoncing this on a wwe show and put it on the net and showed us it. then we could add it because it would be a reliable source. Black6989 (talk) 13:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Black6989


 * Agree with GuffasBorgz7, matches do not go up until announced on WWE.com. Over here in the UK, we don't get SmackDown until Saturday 1am. Thanks for contributing, but wait until matches are on WWE.com. Lemon Demon (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * WRONG!!! We get it 2 hours before US do.

EPIC FAIL!!!  Straight   Edge   PXK   20:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

it starts at 10:00pm on a Friday night in the UK michaelc2007 (talk) 22:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.216.2 (talk)
 * Matches are added when a reliable source is available. WON is considered a reliable source via consensus of WP:PW, thus the matches should be added. Wikipedia cannot exclude content because it is a spoiler, since that is unencyclopedic. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed, it has been aired somewhere else and somepeople have already seen it, so it isn't a spoiler.  T r U C o 9 31 1 23:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems every PPV there is this argument. WeLsHy (talk) 00:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

mainly because those idiots cant seem to comprehend that if Uk and Oz both say something on smackdown is there, its probably there. Besides, can't we just wait 2 hours to source something once it is on UK TV?  Straight   Edge   PXK   11:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The main problem isn't waiting for between the UK airing and US airing, the problem is idiots who read spoiler reports on Tuesday night and try to add things in the article (nevermind the fact that spoiler reports are not reliable sources). Next week is gonna be hell since WWE is taping the following weeks RAW a week in advance and the following weeks SmackDown a week in advance too.  TJ   Spyke   12:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Apologies for my lack of temporal sense. Lemon Demon (talk) 18:16, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Same discussion every month... it's starting to get annoying. we dont wait until it has aired in the US, we wait until there is a reliable source. most of the time that is wwe.com (which is updated after the us airing), but if someone can provide a reliable source, we add it. But again, just someone saying "it happened" and another one agreeing, is not a source. FOr the next time - record what long says and upload it. thats reliable. Diivoo (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Diivoo is correct. It is getting a little annoying and tedious to have to put up with people bringing this issue up all the time. Let it go! -G uf fa s  B or gz   7- 20:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

RAW/SmackDown! Elimination Chamber Matches
There are two elimination chamber matches and No Way Out 2008. I suggest that we label them according to their brand, just to make it easier and less confusing. E.g. The RAW Elimination Chamber and the SmackDown! Elimination Chamber. Anyone have any objections? GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 23:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see why we couldnt..-- T r U C o 9 31 1 23:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. It makes sense to label them according to brand. NiciVampireHeart (talk) 23:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * But TJ mentioned that we shouldn't label them, so Im guessing it will remain unlabeled.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 23:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

They should be labeled because thats what the WWE have done on WWE.com michaelc2007 (talk) 3:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.216.2 (talk)
 * It's not part of the match name though, they won't say "wrestler A won a SmackDown Elimination Chamber match". They would say "wrestler A won a Elimination Chamber match". It was decided long ago not to list matches based on brand name.  TJ   Spyke   07:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * We are going to stick with it. WWE.com has posted on their website the RAW or SmackDown! elimination chamber, so we are going to as well. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 08:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, you don't decided what we do (see WP:OWN). I have made it so it mentions the brands without implying that there is such a thing as a "RAW Elimination Chamber match", it's just "Elimination Chamber match".  TJ   Spyke   08:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I agreed with GuffasBorgz7 earlier; however, the way TJ has done it is fine, it works within the article and it avoids all the confusion. Personally I'm on TJ's side in this. NiciVampireHeart (talk) 18:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not necessary. The brand is implied by the title shot the participants are competing for. Seems redundant to list anything to me. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 19:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that it looks good as it is. No need to put "Raw" or "SmackDown!" in front of the words "Elimination Chamber Match" and that is only because I know that the World Heavyweight title belongs to "Friday Night SmackDown!" and the WWE Championship belongs to "WWE Monday Night Raw."  But lets assume that you didn't know that the two titles belong to their respective shows (and I don't know anyone who wouldn't unless you don't watch WWE programming), how are you going to know which "Elimination Chamber Match" belongs to which show? Gibsonj338 (talk) 19:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

http://www.wwe.com/shows/nowayout/matches - they are called the "RAW" EC match and the "SmackDown!/ECW" EC match. We should change it accordingly. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 19:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with GuffasBorgz7 with the link that he provided that the two Elimination Chamber matches should be changed according to how the WWE has it on their website. So I will change it according to how the WWE has it on their web site and if you don't like it, don't chage it back until it is agreed upon to change it back. Gibsonj338 (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not meant to be a carbon copy of WWE.com. Just because they do it one way, doesn't mean we have to. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 21:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * So if the WWE were to have a match that they called "Last Ride," being that Wikipedia is not ment to be a carbon copy of WWE.com, Wikipedia should call the match "Hearst?" Gibsonj338 (talk) 21:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course not. That's a separate match type. If they billed the match as a "Shit on a pole" match, then so would we. Come to think of it, you twisted what I was trying to say, but also made me realize that adding Raw/Smackdown in front of the EC matches might not be so far off from that. Oh well. Let's wait for more opinions. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 21:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the way it is listed now is fine. Anyone with half a brain can click on either of the belt links and see what brand each match is for, so listing them how WWE.com has would be redundant.  ArcAngel (talk) 21:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with ArcAngel, adding what brand the elimination chamber match is from is redundant. We iz an encyclopedia not no newsite. The damn match is an Elimination Chamber match, once someone expands this article, the RAW/SmackDown!-ECW names can be added to the event section, but for now it should just be called the Elimination Chamber. If you want to know what brand it is from look at the wrestlers articles to find out, or the Championship's article. T r U C o 9 31 1 22:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, to me it doesn't make sense if we add Raw Elimination Chamber match and SmackDown! Elimination Chamber match, honestly, do we need to add which show goes with what match is scheduled? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not only can you tell what brand it is by the titles, you can tell by the Superstars in them. So there is no point putting RAW and SmackDown in front of them. And I think it was TJ who said they're not going to put Someone won the RAW Elimination Chamber, it's just going to say they won an Elimination Chamber to become the number 1 contender for the WWE Title. Also, isn't this SmackDowns first Elimination Chamber? WeLsHy (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Indeed it is. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * If the words "Raw" and "SmackDown!" won't be in front of the words "Elimination Chamber Match," then how come the words "Raw" and "SmackDown!" are in front of the words "Elimination Chamber Match" on the WrestleMania XXIV page? Gibsonj338 (talk) 05:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Good Point Gibsonj338. As someone said, if the WWE billed the match as "Shit On A Pole" match, then so would we. WWE has billed this match as the RAW Elimination Chamber match, and the SmackDown!/ECW Elimination Chamber match, so why are we not following the policy? It also makes it easier. As an encyclopedia, we shouldn't be making things more difficult. It saves people having to read the dot point underneath to see what championship, and if they aren't familiar with that championship, have to go to another article to find out which brand that championship is exclusive to. It just saves a whole load of hassle. Also, I think that we should say, so and so won the RAW or SD!/ECW EC matches. Otherwise if we just said that so and so won the EC match, some people may say, "Oh, but which EC match? There were two at No Way Out weren't there?" We don't normally label the matches according to their brand, but there is not often two of one match type (excluding the basic normal match of course). Usually the special matches are unique per pay-per-view and we don't bother to say the "SmackDown! Triple Threat Match" for example. But this is different, there are two of the same match, exclusive to two brands, and it should be noted. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 09:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I just added "Raw" and "SmackDown!/ECW" in front of the words "Elimination Chamber Match" to make it easier to tell the difference between the two matches. Please don't get rid of the two as this is the second time that I had to readd it again.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gibsonj338 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't be there at all, really so I reverted your edit as it was pointed out it's redundant info. ArcAngel (talk) 18:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * agree with arcangel it's redundant S-PAC54 18:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopedia, relevant information is not redundant. It should be added! GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 05:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not relevent though, and the notes already say what title the winners get shots at. And please don't try and claim that there are a majority of people supporting including the info (like you said on my talkpage) when there is clearly NOT a consensus.  TJ   Spyke   05:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I apologise if I made a mistake, from my memory I thought that there was. It is quite relevant and makes it simple. Also besides that, it is what WWE has billed it as, so we should follow suit. We are not here to give an opinion on the relevance of it! I do not care whether it is called the RAW Elimination Chamber match or the Elimination Chamber match (RAW), just have the name in it somewhere, clears up confusion. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 05:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Per previous compromises with "Billed as" matches. Its the same reason we don't have "Legend vs Legend Killer" or "Battle of the Billionaires" matches. They're regular Elimination Chamber matches with brand-specific participants. -- bullet proof  3:16 05:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I wasn't the one that removed the brand names, someone else did that in the last few days when I was gone (I wasn't able to get online due to Internet connection problems). To be honest, the only reason I agree the brands should be mentioned at all is because the winners get title shots at WM. If these EC matches were for titles (like every previous one was), then I would see no reason to mention the brands.  TJ   Spyke   06:01, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we should agree to leave it as: "Elimination Chamber (RAW)" and the same for SD!/ECW. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 06:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That's the compromise then. Agreed. -- bullet proof  3:16 06:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How I had it with "Raw" and "SmackDown!/ECW" in front of the words "Elimination Chamber Match" was just as good, but having the words "Raw" and "SmackDown!/ECW" in s I think is better. I wonder why I didn't think of that. Gibsonj338 (talk) 07:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

World Heavyweight Championship match
Not according to the schedule on the No Way Out page. Although this may sound like crystal ballin', Vickie Guerrero is back and might have something to say about it [Edge v Mysterio]. Dlae │  here  22:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well now that you mentioned that link, I don't think that match is for the title. The Cena vs Orton match says WWE Championship match, but the Mysterio Edge match doesn't say it's a title match.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 22:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * it says it in the preview MATT (talk) 03:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea, I see now. Plus that JR just said it on Raw-- T r U C o 9 31 1 03:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * When Teddy Long announced the match on the February 1, 2008 edition of SmackDown!, he said that it was a rematch (implying that it was under the same circumstances as the Royal Rumble) and he also stated that it was indeed for the World Heavyweight Championship. GuffasBorgz7 (talk) 09:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

At No Way Out, the two are set to do battle for the coveted gold once again in a rematch

With his title on the line for the second time in less than a month

It's a title match. Tromboneguy0186 (talk) 12:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * that has already been established S-PAC54 15:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Elimination Chamber 2 in 1 year ....
The article said that it was not only the first time that 2 chambers were used in the same night but in the same year ... 2006 : New Year's Revolution (Cena, Angle , Carlito , Masters , Kane , Micheals) December 2 Dismember (RVD, Test , Lashley , Show , Holly , Punk) I've made the correction Guiltypetit89 11:30 EST Feburary 10th, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guiltypetit89 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well spotted. -G uf fa s  B or gz   7- 09:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It said 2 chambers in 1 nite. not 2 chambers in 1 year —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrispowellathome (talk • contribs) 15:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Smackdown Elimination Chamber
It said on 11/02 RAW that although a ECW competitor is in it, It is still called the Smackdown! Elimantion Chamber, If you don't believe me, thats what the preview for the match is --Pwned by Numyht (talk) 17:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC) 'It seems that on the website, it calls it ECW/Smackdown! Elimi Chamber, confusing......Revert it if you want--Pwned by Numyht (talk) 17:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * We don't call them "RAW Elimination Chamber" or "SmackDown Elimination Chamber", so this is all moot.  TJ   Spyke   00:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Why don't we call them that anyway? Mshake3 (talk) 05:17, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * A consensus was reached in this very talk page (See Above). We have agreed to call them the Elimination Chamber (RAW) and the Elimination Chamber (SmackDown!/ECW). Please do not change this. It is stated on WWE.com as the SmackDown!/ECW Elimination Chamber and we will not change that based on opinion. -G uf fa s  B or gz   7- 05:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I don't see a "!", so I'm removing that. Mshake3 (talk) 16:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Mate, are you just out to cause trouble? The show is called SmackDown!. Go to the SmackDown! page to find that out. Please don't remove the "!". -G uf fa s  B or gz   7- 22:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Personally I think it's ridiculous that the "!" and a capital D have to be included every time and that Impact is spelled iMPACT!. It's tedious and looks stupid...then again, it's a MOS issue, I guess. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, iMPACT! isn't the correct MOS style either.

Well that is your opinion. Unfortunately Wikipedia works with facts and not opinions. -G uf fa s  B or gz   7- 22:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fact, they don't use the ! character. Mshake3 (talk) 22:58, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know that's my opinion, but I was just throwing it out there. I know Wikipedia is based on facts. I've been an active editor for over a year! Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Edge vs Rey?
I read on wwe.com rey had a bicep injury. is this kayfabe or legit and if so do we know if he will still compete at NWO 2008?Black6989 (talk) 23:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Black6989
 * We currently have no idea if it's kayfabe or not. We'll see when more info becomes available. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 23:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It is most likely a real injury but it looks like that he will persevere through No Way Out with that injury. If it was just a storyline they would of done it on SmackDown! not on an overseas tour. WWE has not given an update on his condition or whether or not he will be participating. -G uf fa s  B or gz   7- 11:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This week's SmackDown was taped last week, so they couldn't have done it then, hence why it happened on an overseas tour, kayfabe or not. I highly doubt it's kayfabe though. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I doubt it's fake; it's probably either minor enough that it won't affect anything, Rey'll go for a few months until he needs to get it taken care of, or they'll job him for it and put him on a leave of absence very soon. Time will tell.3pointswish (talk) 00:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

If it was fake why would they have said it on wwe.com? Baseball16 (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * wwe.com reports storyline injuries too. WWE.com is a mix of kayfabe and real stories.  TJ   Spyke   01:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

They do? Baseball16 (talk) 01:48, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just like they show kayfabe injuries on the show... and Mr. McMahon's death, that was awesome... (sorry for being off topic, couldn't resist :D) 3pointswish (talk) 02:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Should we note Rey's injury on the page? 3pointswish (talk) 02:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * IMO, no. He didn't suffer the injury at the show and he still wrestled (albeit in a very short match to avoid further injury).  TJ   Spyke   02:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How about in the background? 3pointswish (talk) 03:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure. I'm not sure if anyone is working on the background section right now though.  TJ   Spyke   03:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I need help with referencing, wording, etc. :D 3pointswish (talk) 03:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Was the mayweather big show confrontation kayfabe?? {mattyports} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Portsman (talk • contribs) 16:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It was staged. btw i read on a spoiler page that Rey's injury is quite serious, but he will try to work through WrestleMania 24 and miss 6 months after that for surgery and recovery. J.C. (talk) 03:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

page
Who destroied the page???? Baseball16 (talk) 02:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Should someone put the orders of elimination in, who eliminated who, stuff like that? I don't know them (and I can't edit the page anyway). actually, all of a sudden i can now...3pointswish (talk) 02:13, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * We will once we have the information available.-- T r U C o 9 31 1 02:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

question
WHO PUT THAT RANDOM QUESTION ON THE ARTICLE? WHY NOT ON THE TALKPAGE?Baseball16 (talk) 03:31, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * An IP, it's been reverted. Apparently the IP was impatient and wanted to know what was happening in the Raw Elimination Chamber.  TJ   Spyke   03:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

ok i just saw. sorry for the outbreak dude.Baseball16 (talk) 03:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)