Talk:Randy Orton/Archive 2

Request for assessment
I noticed this page was added for the "requests for assessment" on the WP:PW assessment page. I'd agree with the current assessment as a B article. Suggestions for improvement:


 * Put the citations behind the punctuation instead of before (which they are currently).
 * Most of the current sources are wrestling results. Try to get other sources from places like SLAM! Wrestling, interviews, books, etc. to help with information other than merely match results.
 * Try to make a more well-rounded article by fleshing out the information on his early-life and backstage life (there is a little bit, but more is needed).
 * Fix the current citation templates. Citation templates will help with that.

These suggestions will really help out the article. Nikki311 21:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Legend Killer article
Legend Killer should be seperated from this article, because it details all the legends being killed, and goes on to be a long article. If they are merged, it will take essence away from both articles. We can mention the other article, and write "Main Article: Legend Killer" in a paragraph in this article.Lex94 13:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No it shouldn't!!!! Why not make a new section in Orton's article and headline it: Legends Killed? There's no need to create an article for "Legend Killer"!!!! --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:08, 05 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't just copy and paste the entire article into this one. It needs to be trimmed down considerably. Maybe just add a list of names instead of detail, as most of it is already covered in the actual article. - Deep   Shadow  05:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thats my point. I made a detailed description of every single legend killing. Like the one in wwe.com, but each one only has 1 paragraph and there are more Legends. Why have to trim the list down, when it can have much great information on another page. why cant they coexist. Lex94 05:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I trimmed it. Lex94 05:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

It's still too much. Like I said before, all the information is already noted. It's redundant to list it again. - Deep   Shadow  05:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I nominated the articles for merger because it seems silly to have two articles. One seems to be about the person Randy Orton, including his professional life and one about a persona used in his professional life. The second is clearly just a part of the first, and as has been noted, much of the material in the second article is covered (and needs to be covered) in the first article. Thehalfone 09:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the merger. The fact is, that the Legend Killer article isn't that notable, especially with mentions in Orton's main article to begin with. It should be merged and trimmed down even more. A character's gimmick shouldn't be put into a separate article unless the gimmick lasts for many years. The only example I can think of is Personas of The Undertaker. Gavyn Sykes 05:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Ric Flair should be a legend killed, Randy Orton himself said, on the July, 30th 2007 episode of RAW that Ric Flair was a legend that he has killed. 09:55, 30 July 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.190.40.236 (talk • contribs)

Chris Benoit
In the Legend Killer section, Chris Benoit should be removed. I think killing your family doesn't qualify you as a "Legend". Tech43 00:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of his actions, Benoit was considered a future HoF inductee, and as such, can be considered a legend. Killswitch Engage 08:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It's too uncomfortable to call him a legend. A legend represents wrestling in a positive way. Benoit doesn't do that. I still think we should remove it from the article. I don't care what people considered him when he was alive. The truth is he is a monster, not a legend. And only legends should be represented in this article. Tech43 17:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

youre censoring the benoit trgadgedy like the WWE. we cant just pretend that it didn't happen. Also, while what Chris Benoit did was terrible, he was still an amazing wrestler, and future HoF.

How can you say such a thing that is so disrespectful. so he killed his famliy along with himself i'm not to happy about his actions either but the man deserves respect, as a wrestler he's put himself through so much to entertan the his audiences wheather he was booed or cheered. He didn't have to do it but he did and for many years. so i strongly agree that he's a legend. He's even considered a future Hall of Fame inductee and rightfuly so. He's also broken records. but his death is compleatly irrealvent to his carear.

Hey If you don't like Benoit find But get the facts before you go off calling him a Killer because guess what he was Murder so how can he be a killer if he was Murder too You know you all say Benoit is going to hell when then i guess he can be there with Eddie Supermike

He deserves respect? How? He killed his wife and son. The negatives far outweigh the positives. Hey, I enjoyed watching him when he was alive too. And before they announced what happened I was sad for him. But now that I know what happened, I think he shouldn't be considered a legend. How can you call that monster a legend? In fact, really how can you call anyone in wrestling a legend right now? Drugs, strroids, Cocaine, painkillers? How can we call anyone a legend, much less a monster who put on a fake look and pretended to be so friendly? He's a monster, a hypocrite, and I don't know why I have to be the one to speak up and say " Remove this monster from the moniker, legend!" Tech43 21:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no doubt that he entertained audiences but I do not think that he deserves to be a legend or a hall of famer. That would just be plain stupidity since it would look as if the WWE were glorifying a murderer. I'm sure that most people would agree that a man who murders his wife and son should not be given any signs of respect. Tywddle 18:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey I compleatly understand where you'r coming from and ya know what i'd probely agree too if he did it on air. But he didn't. Not to sound redundent or anything but I don't agree with the mans actions. However wwe should respect what he's done in the ring personal issues going on or not. so I'll end it here saying that's why i think wwe well consider benoit a legend and Hall of Famer. it should be strictly For his talent in the company, Not his problems outside of it.

You know, despite all the controversey I've started, we still don't have an answer. Are we gonna remove him from the page or are we gonna be little crying girls and continue to bicker? I started this topic for a reason, to remove Benoit from the page. It's time an administrator does. Oh, and to whoever wrote that last post, Benoit's accomplishments don't matter to anyone anymore. He's a killer, and killers don't get any respect, no matter what they did. So let's be men, and remove him from the page. If someone dosen't, I will. Tech43 08:11, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

ya know what, your right if you mean that this topic should be removed from orten's wiki talk page. honstly this argument/contoversey whatever you wanna call it could go on forever. let's face it to a degree it's kinda pointless arguing over a dead man I mean really thier's better stuff to argue about.

I have a question for whoever wrote that last thing. Do you have something aganist me? I mean honestly, you seem to be trying to put your opinions ahead of mine. I write, you respond. It's getting a little freaky. And since your probaly gonna come back and put yourself ahead of me again, just post your response on my talk page. Tech43 08:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Christ you people are pathetic. This isn't a freaking ethics debate, it's an encyclopedia. Do you notice how no one in the O.J Simpson Discussion is saying "OMG, DON'T SAY THAT HE WAS THE FIRST PLAYER TO RUN FOR 2,000 YARDS, HE LIK, KILLED SUM PEOPLE!!!!11one". He was a future HoF inductee, and any source will tell you he made a volatile impact on the industry in general, and in the WCW/WWE franchises specifically. Lettuceclock 05:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, I don't think anyone said that they thought he wasn't a future HoF to begin with. No one is denying his accomplishments in pro wrestling or that he had a big impact. Also no one said that his wrestling career did not matter anymore because he was a murderer. Tywddle 21:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

He had ability. And he would have been inducted into the HoF eventually too. It's just that he really shouldn't be presented as a "Legend". That's my opinion, and if ya wanna rip me apart again, i'll be glad to go against yours. Oh, and to who ever called us all pathetic I got 3 words for ya: Get a life. Tech43 06:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

hah ha now this time I'll agree with EVERYTHING AND YES I SAID EVERYTHING YOU'VE JUST SAID no ifs ands or buts espeacilly on the last part. But that's too bad beacuse now their's nothing to argue about haha. mike

Mike, sorry i insulted you, sort of. We just had different opinions. Tech43 03:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

HEY, GUYS! If we do this "Legends Killed" list by trying to go through who we think is or should be hailed as a legend, it's never gonna be anything conclusive. As has been expressed numerous times, Orton's stated victims should count as the final note into making the list, because those are the ones whose decisive defeats/attacks at the hands of Orton himself are being used to establish Orton's gimmick. So, as far as anyone we're gonna put on the Legends Killed list, we've gotta go by the criteria by which people get named Legends Killed in his gimmick, which almost anyone and their mother could probably tell goes as follows: The fact is, Chris Benoit was defeated by Randy Orton for the World Heavyweight Championship. He was referred to as a "Legend Killed" on one of Randy Orton's Legend Killer Tour T-shirts. I wouldn't call Chris Benoit a legend anymore after what he did, either. Normally I'd be all for the position of taking him off the list. However, the fact is, Orton defeated Benoit, and referred to him as a "Legend Killed" somewhere, both years before he turned from Rabid Wolverine to Rabid Murderine. This isn't about our opinions, this isn't about ethics, and despite the fact that it's Chris Benoit's name we're arguing about, this isn't about Chris Benoit. It's about Randy Orton. And if Randy Orton defeated Chris Benoit, and referred to Chris Benoit as a "Legend Killed", that makes Chris Benoit a "Legend Killed" according to Randy Orton's character. That alone (which even goes without mentioning that that was the biggest victory in Randy Orton's career) forces us to put Chris Benoit as a "Legend Killed" on this list, if Wikipedia really is trying to be as objective, NPOV, and accurate as per official sources/media as possible. 63.3.16.2 05:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Be referred to as a "Legend" by Randy Orton.
 * 2) Be defeated or attacked in a very decisive/possibly feud-ending manner by Randy Orton, preferrably with him making use of the RKO.
 * 3) Be referred to as a "Legend Killed" by Randy Orton. (If he hasn't referred to you as a "Legend" before referring to you as a "Legend Killed", this counts for both.)

What does "Being more intact with his Legend Killer persona" mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.11.141 (talk • contribs)
 * It means he highly focuses on "killing" legends. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:08, 01 August 2007 (UTC)

No. 1 Contender
Orton is the No. 1 contender for the WWE Championship. Shouldn't that be mentioned somewhere? Calgary 20:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It should be mentioned. Tech43 03:55, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It is MENTIONED. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

it also says hes already won the wwe title, so wats that say to u? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)
 * Where in the article does is state that? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Survivor Series runs
Should it be noted that Randy was the final member of a winning Survivor Series team in the 2003-2005 events, as well as the final member of his team (wich lost) at the 2006 Survivor Series? This seems like a fairly impressive accomplishment to me, but I'm not positive as to Wikipedia's policy on mentioning such things. Nearphotison 08:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * That should be noted in the Survivor Series page. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:36, 01 August 2007 (UTC)

Review?
OK, I'm quite new to this, so I don't know exactly how it works, but I was reading through this article and IMHO it's in a really good state. So what's the procedure for pushing it towards GA? Does it get peer reviewed? Do I nominate it somehow? Cheers, Fatjabba 12:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

This is really good, but I think more should be added at the end of 2007. The sentence is finished bluntly imo. -- Yasmin.
 * There is a problem with the citations, someone has linked the date & year in the title of the match results which is problematic (and against policy) see what happens is that if the title of the page is "Raw 16-6-2006" and 16-6-2006 is wikilinked then only the word "Raw" actually links you to the cited article so "Raw" instead of "Raw 16-6-2006", that needs to be fixed before this can even hope to become a GA and that's just the first and most obvious issue MPJ-DK 05:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Legend Killer or Legend Destroyer?
On wwe.com, they are referencing him now as the Legend Destroyer instead of the Legend Killer. I think its because of the Chris Benoit tragedy. They even got rid of the Legend Killer page on the site. I believe that we should be called as the Legend Destroyer here also, and we may reference his past nickname, the Legend Killer Lex94 18:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Just because the website removed "Legend Killer" doesn't mean anything. Until they make note on that on RAW then we'll make the change. But until then, he still is being referred to as Legend Killer. And one other thing, on RAW, Vince said that the WWE is being investigated and maybe that's why they removed Legend Killer to Legend Destroyer. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:44, 09 August 2007 (UTC)

billy graham
it says in the article that Graham encouraged him to fight the Undertaker, but since Graham is a legend, I'm wondering, was he challenged personally by Randy, or did he come just to give advice?-- Sc r ew ba ll 23 talk 21:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it was for advice. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I assumed so because Graham is pretty old and I never remember any type of feud. If you have an old magazine source or info on the two, let me know.-- Sc r ew ba ll 23 talk 21:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll see to it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I found this one. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:03, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

promising face?
I know, I made up the title, but the entire reason I did was because of hindsight about what he is now. When he was a face, he showed little promise for making it big. Maybe the section should be renamed because at the time, he really wan't making an impact. "Un-promising face is more like it.-- Sc r ew ba ll 23 talk 23:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Conflicting Information
On Rob Van Dam's page, it is stated that the injury he suffered from a DDT to the concrete was legit, yet here it is stated it was kayfabe. Since neither are sourced, which is it? This needs fixing. Kevinazite 09:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, on RVD's page it states that he suffered a "legit" concussion; so I add it it here. But I'm not sure if he in fact suffered one or not. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)