Talk:Royal Rumble (2009)

30 Man Royal Rumble Match
i keep adding the 30 man royal rumble match but gets deleted. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.87.41 (talk) 22:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Even though it will probably happen its still unconfirmed SuperSilver901 (talk) 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes we have to wait till it is confirmed. Like at Survivor Series. They usually have a survivor series elimination match but they've had it happen before where it never happened.-- Will C  04:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Dont be stupid! Why would they not have a Royal Rumble match at the royal rumble? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigtubby (talk • contribs) 20:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I will never know why they wouldn't have a Royal Rumble but you never know they could stop the tradition SuperSilver901 (talk) 01:52, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

- This Rumble is taking place in Detroit, Michigan at Joe Louis Arena - confirmed. Please edit. Also, the Royal Rumble match is confirmed. Please edit.
 * You need a reliable source to back up both of those claims. And please sign your posts using four ~. Thanks, ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 14:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Royal Rumble 2009 will be held in Detroit at Joe Louis Arena. Friend in radio says station has received promotional material, and Mike Johnson of PWInsider.com has reported it. Rojo101 (talk) 07:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

First you said it was at the Palace at Auburn Hills and now this make up your mind BTW do you have the URL? SuperSilver901 (talk) 19:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

There's no point in adding the Royal Rumble match if zero of the thirty participants have been announced. JayLethal2008 16:01, 3 November 2008
 * Exactly its like adding a WWE title match to the Wrestlemania 25 page, sure there will be one but no one knows who will be in it. Bencey (talk) 03:07, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

In Spain they have vignettes anouncing the match, I don't know about the USA but in Spain they're already anouncing it.  Kala  jan   21:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Should we make a list of the rumble participants prior to the match occurring. Triple H was just confirmed for it on 1/2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crippler4 (talk • contribs) 01:09, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Dos Caras, Jr.
It should be noted on the page that he is rumored to debut at this pay-per-view. JayLethal2008 08:32, 4 November 2008
 * Keyword "rumor," Wikipedia is not a Crystal Ball.-- S R X  14:36, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

As i recall John Cena was added on the Survivor Series 2008 page as Rumored to return from injury. The Jay   Experience  21:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I recall that having a reliable source SuperSilver901 (talk) 22:55, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I recall that too, but I don't recall seeing a source for Dos Caras. Kala jan  €  ₣  23:28, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Caras Jr recently resigned to his Mexican promotion and most sites believe that due to the economic situation they terminated his deal and might renogicate at a later date. This is all here-say as I can't give you a 100% source but it is right now common internet belief. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.27.12.202 (talk • contribs)

Should the Poster be remove since it was not made by WWE
What? No it shouldn't, it was made by WWE SuperSilver901 (talk) 00:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok I didn't right the title, but I have another question. Should we not use the one from WWEAffiliates because it has the date? Also keeps it consistent with the other PPV pages. (Loosie (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC))

I have no idea why it was changed to the one to InDemand can someone explain? SuperSilver901 (talk) 20:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I was going by the last years poster. Considering the one from In Demand is bigger and is the full poster. Yes it doesn't have the date but I don't think that is very important. Also are we even sure that WWE Affiliates is even owned by WWE. I've seen no proof of that beisdes a logo and that doesn't mean much.-- Will C  22:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Its an affiliation to the WWE requiring corporate/employee login, although, their image database is publicly accessible. --SRX 23:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

is the new poster not just a blowen up copy of the other one excpet with a date? if you look at where john cena is on the two its basically the same just closed up on that one part so what should it matter? in my personal opinion the one with the more wrestlers on it looks better as it shows kinda what a royal rumble is like a brawl between loads of wrestlers. people who dont watch wrestling may get a better idea from this. just a thjoughtBlack6989 (talk) 21:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)black6989

World Heavyweight Championship Match
John Cena will be defending the title at the Royal Rumble, as announced on RAW. Should it be added?. --KingOfDX (talk) 01:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * They didn't say he will be defending it at the Royal Rumble, they said on Raw.--SRX 03:08, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you see Tribute to the Troops?... --KingOfDX (talk) 01:46, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Check the date, his comment was made before the Tribute to the Troops special aired. Before that, they only said the winner would eventually get a WHC match.  TJ   Spyke   02:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Guys to clear this up, it is at the Rumble. I watched a commercial on USA not too long ago for Raw that said the winner would challenge Cena at the Royal Rumble.-- Will C  02:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Next Monday, there will be a fatal four way match between Shawn Michaels, JBL, Randy Orton, and CM Punk and the winner of that will face Cena at the Rumble for the WHC. http://www.wwe.com/content/media/video/vms/raw/2008/december22-28/9002164-- Harvey "Two-Face" Dent  (Muhaha!!) 14:22, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Is it not Michaels, JBL, Orton and Jericho. Cause jericho beat Punk to qualify. Adster95 (talk) 15:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * My bad. Michaels, JBL, Orton, and JERICHO.-- Harvey "Two-Face" Dent  (Muhaha!!) 16:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

ICP and Scott Hall
Insane Clown Posse and Scott Hall, despite not being WWE employes, are attending the PPV. It should be mentioned here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.174.55 (talk • contribs)
 * You have no source for your claims, so no.  TJ   Spyke   18:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Sinofdreams (talk) 23:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems reliable. Kala  jan  €  ₣  23:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * First, the source (which I don't know is all that reliable) basically says they plan to attend the event as part of the audience (so nothing special about that, anybody can attend if they have a ticket). Second, there is no telling if they actually will attend. If they do, maybe afterward a 1 sentence mention.  TJ   Spyke   23:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yah actually, I'm famous in my town so if I go to a Kris Kristofferson concert I should be added on the concert's wikipedia page... And Akon attended to Raw once too, and so did the guy from home alone, and loads of them do. Kala  jan  €  ₣  23:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

WWe title match
Friday Night Smackdown has been taped this week, so since I know SOMEONE will try to take down Hardy vs Edge, it was indeed confirmed on the taping of SD. Need a ref? I was there. -- Harvey "Two-Face" Dent  (Muhaha!!) 14:43, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * He's right, please don't remove. I'll try to find a confiable source to add. Brady4mvp (Talk) 15:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "I was there" is not a acceptable source.  TJ   Spyke   17:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Heres a source, it said AFTER smackdown taping. http://www.wrestlezone.com//article.php?articleid=232699447 --Pookeo9 (talk) 23:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wrestlezone is not considered a reliable source by WP:PW.  TJ   Spyke   23:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In other words, you DONT blieve me, and think that I am lying when I said it was confirmed? You DONT blieve I was there? -- Harvey "Two-Face" Dent  (Muhaha!!) 14:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Is THIS reliable? http://www.f4wonline.com/content/view/7916/ -- Harvey "Two-Face" Dent   (Muhaha!!) 16:09, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter if I believe you, someone saying "I saw it" it not a reliable source according to WP:RS. That second site is, although my personal opinion is that spoilers shouldn't be added until the show airs.  TJ   Spyke   16:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Per WP:SPOILER and WP:CRYSTAL, spoilers shouldn't be added until a reliable source, mainly a primary source, announces it. Thus, f4wrestling.com is not reliable in this case, nor are other wrestling sites but the promotion's website.--SRX 16:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah. I forgot that even reliable sites like that aren't really acceptable for spoilers since they are counting on others to send in those reports and have no way to verify either.  TJ   Spyke   17:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, he is saying he was there. Wikipedia should be a encyclopedia made with human knowledge. So, he was there, he's seen it. It's in his knowledge. We should add it to the article. Brady4mvp (Talk) 16:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Until the information is sourced and documented it is considered unverified and original research.  Hazardous   Matt   16:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Can we post the Title match and the announced Rumble Match participants, since the show has aired in several countries, or shall we wait until the US airing? Steveweiser (talk) 00:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait For the US airing before adding it. 71.190.100.31 (talk) 21:23, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * We should let him add it and if we find out it's a lie we can easilly report him and get him banned. Kala  jan  €  ₣  23:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Guys, take a look at the dates. The post was made several days ago. SmackDown has already aired and the info is in the article (and sourced).  TJ   Spyke   23:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * So who said that someone is going to face these two guys (Hardy n' Edge)? I missed it cos my brothers were watching a film... Kala  jan  €  ₣  23:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Triple H
Is he in the Rumble or is he in it after he wins the Triple Jeapardy?Sinofdreams (talk) 00:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * He is already in. The triple jeopardy thing is just a punishment for embarrassing Vickie.  TJ   Spyke   00:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Change in Article?
Based off of what Cena did last year, should "The winner will get a World Championship match at WWE's April PPV event, WrestleMania XXV," be changed to "The winner will get a future World Championship match," ? Spongemaster0 (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Kala jan  €  ₣  20:43, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, because as of late, WWE has advertised that the winner will receive a match at WrestleMania XXV. If they do change it, that is on WWE, but as of right now, they are promoting the winner going to WrestleMania.--Truco 21:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah sorry, I thought that Spongemaster had said: Based off of what Cena did last year, should "The winner will get a World heavyweight Championship match at WWE's April PPV event, WrestleMania XXV," be changed to "The winner will get a future World Championship match," ? Spongemaster0 (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC) Sorry. Kala jan  €  ₣  22:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

If you want to be factual you may choose to add "If they so choose" as technically like Cena they could ask for it earlier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.27.12.202 (talk) 02:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Moorison and Miz
Shouldn't they be in ECW not RAW?  Benton   Tigers   16:26, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * They are. Check the table again. They have ECW listed as their brand, Raw is just the show on which their RR appearence was announced.  TJ   Spyke   16:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Participants
I think some problems are going on about Kane or whatever, so here's the list of participants. 'Hope I helped. Kala jan  €  ₣  18:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * What problem with Kane?  Hazardous   Matt   19:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Dunno I had this page on my watchlist and I keep seeing people argue about Kane or something like that. Kala  jan  €  ₣  19:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem was that WWE announced on Raw that Kane would be in the RR match but didn't add him to the website until today. Someone removed him yesterday and claimed that WWE hadn't announced him for the match. He's now on the site too.  TJ   Spyke   20:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That's it, yeah. Kala  jan  €  ₣  21:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

ECW title match
Announced at Friday Night Smackdown which has been taped this week, ECW championship will be defended by champion Jack Swagger against Matt Hardy. I know this since we in India get to see SmackDown a day before its telecast in US. Also this is my first Wikipedia edit. So hope its right way to get going.. --Wild MaCkeR (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:RS for info on sources and adding them to articles. Since I don't live in India, I can't verify the info (well, maybe it's on YouTube by now).  TJ   Spyke   17:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It can be added because it has aired already in the eastern hemisphere already.-- Tru co  21:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

R-Truth was in The Royal Rumble
R-Truth was in the Royal Rumble 2001 and his name was K-Kwik but he was eliminated by the Big Show' 5:06 17 January 2009 (UTC) User:DVG991
 * And? WWE.com seems to want to pretend that R-Truth was never K-Kwik. It's just like how they pretend that Kane was never Isaac Yankem or the fake Diesel.  TJ   Spyke   04:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)


 * WWE.com is blind but if they no about it WWF that fetus was the inposter kane and yes R-Truth was K-Kwik but if you luke in the name list of Ron Killing Than you see tha R-Truth was K-Kwik and maybe kane was the fake dieles or isaac yankem and those two names are on Glen Jacbs Name ' 7:16 17 January 2009 (UTC) User:DVG991
 * Per what TJ Spyke says they want to pretend that past character's never existed and we know R-Truth was K-Kwik but what does this have to do you with the article anyways? SuperSilver901 (talk) 20:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Proper Grammar
I'll concur that "as follows" sound funky, but proper grammar dictates that there must be a complete, independent clause before a colon. If someone has a better suggestion, I'm all for it. --ECWAGuru (talk) 17:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we're not understanding what an "independent clause" is. "The confirmed wrestlers are" is still not a complete sentence in and of itself.--ECWAGuru (talk) 17:40, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Naming Issue
I'm also confused about the naming issue. I thought part of the whole "out of universe" issue was that real names were supposed to be provided in parenthesis after the wrestler's ring name. You said that Shawn Michaels is much more well-known by his ring name, but how many people know Beth Phoenix as "Elizabeth Carolan?"--ECWAGuru (talk) 17:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:PW for more info. Basically, the real name only needs to be used if they are known by multiple names (like Val Venis) or are not well known yet. Shawn Michaels has been using that name for over 20 years and also uses it outside of wrestling. Beth Phoenix is still pretty new, if she keeps that name for another few years, then the same can happen to her.  TJ   Spyke   21:05, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This policy seriously needs to be looked at again. If no clear decision can be made, than it shouldn't exist. Where is the line drawn? Edge doesn't count? He's been consistently using his name for more than 10 years now, yet he still has (Adam Copeland) paired alongside his stage name. Dahumorist (talk) 21:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * What TJ said is the clear policy. Wrestlers who are well known under their ring name do not need their real names. IT all depends on the editor, and how they interpret the policy. If they are not well known under their ring name or have used multiple ring names, a real name is necessary.-- TRU    CO   21:16, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I think that they are known best by their ring names; Pheonix - I had just about a faint idea of her real name, let alone people without internet. Just my opinion. Kala  jan  € · ₣  21:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm just not understanding why the policy isn't consistent across the board. I thought the whole point of policy was so that decisions wouldn't be so discretionary. But c'est la vie -- I'm not going to get embroiled in another debate again.--ECWAGuru (talk) 02:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

WWE in uk
can u put the results for the royal rumble when it shows in uk or do u have to wait in until it airs in united states. MC RIDE (talk) 05:42, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't believe it has aired already in the UK considering it is a live pay-per-view event, so we'll have to wait until it airs here in the United States.-- TRU    CO   23:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

yeah i was talking about when it starts but thanks.MC RIDE 05:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

scripted crap
do we really need the thing about everything being scripted. its tv. its always scripted. if you have to put that ridiculously long paragraph about it being scripted for wrestling, what about on the pages for episodes of tv shows. those are scripted too. yet they don't have a paragraph about how the events on the show are scripted events by paid writers who determine what is said and happens on a show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbhsfootball28 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sigh. Its a policy on Wikipedia. See WP:PW/PPVG.-- TRU    CO   00:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it sucks too. All that is needed is a link to the professional wrestling article. You don't see every fictional movie article devoting a paragraph to stating that it's fictional and just a group of actors pretending to be characters.  TJ   Spyke   00:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

thats freaking retarded. no reason for that —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbhsfootball28 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm tired of all the whiny crap from people. Just shut up. This is the pro wrestling project not the damn tv project or movie project. We make decisions to these article not them. It was a project decision that has been helpful in getting a few FAs. The decision has been discussed a hundred times. Now just be quite and get over it. I've had conversations with people who do not understand wrestling so these paragraphs help in the end. It explains if it is a legit sport or not.-- Will C  00:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow Will, calm down. He is probably new on Wikipedia so he isn't aware of it yet. TJ is aware, he just doesn't like it :)-- TRU    CO   00:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Bingo, and I won't try to hide it. I have stated my objections to it many times and continue to oppose it.  TJ   Spyke   00:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Except we already had several FA's before this and you can not deny that the project is split about issues like this. I disagree with the whole idea of wrestling articles having stricter requirements than other articles.  TJ   Spyke   00:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * See this is why you shouldn't leave Wikipedia :P Our only FA before this was December to Dismember (2006), which was placed up for removal, but it remained after we did this.-- TRU    CO   00:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't recall the project trying to nominate that many articles for FA. Do you really think removing that 1 insignificant paragraph (which isn't needed since we include a link to the pro wrestling article and that article explains about wrestling being scripted) will stop any PPV article from reaching FA status?  TJ   Spyke   00:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It stopped many after SummerSlam (2003) passed, and its a requirement now when going to GAN and FAC.-- TRU    CO   01:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)--  TRU    CO   01:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No disrespect to TJ but my above comment was directed mainly towards him. I have respect for TJ since he is the first to say anything to me on here and was really one of the main ones working on the TNA stuff. Though TJ you should have played more of a role in the discussion while it was going on. I understand you didn't have that ability alot but the discussion went on for a period of two months. There was adequate time to object.-- Will C  02:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't have Internet access at the time. There has been talk about re-visiting the issue since I am not the only regular editor who dislikes it. I don't see the harm in me voicing my objections, it's not like i'm going around removing the info.  TJ   Spyke   02:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Match order
does anyone know the order that the matches will be in?? i thought that the royal rumble was always the main event. 219.90.248.178 (talk) 07:31, 24 January 2009 (UTC)The Crying Man
 * Check the RR's for 1988, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 2006. The Rumble match was not the last match in any of those (the 2006 PPV actually had 2 matches after the Rumble match).  TJ   Spyke   02:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Dark match

 * Jimmy Wang Yang defeated Paul Burchill. Brady4mvp (Talk) 01:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Unreliable source.  Simon KSK  01:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgot about this. But it's the only one I found. Brady4mvp (Talk) 01:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Then it doesn't get added.  Simon KSK  01:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, if the match did happen then eventually a more reliable source will report it. It doesn't have to be added right away.  TJ   Spyke   01:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Just a question, why isn't that a reliable source? Brady4mvp (Talk) 01:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC) wrestlingnewsworld.com has this as the dark match also. Richard is a credible source for wwe.98.209.159.224 (talk) 02:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was at the Royal Rumble and it was Jimmy Wang Yang vs. Burchill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.125.176 (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And? It was already added in with a reliable source.  TJ   Spyke   22:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Order eliminated column
Shouldn't there be an order eliminated column in the entrances and eliminations table? ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 02:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC) I agree 98.209.159.224 (talk) 02:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but the elimination orders are unknown right now.-- TRU    CO   03:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

shouldn't those of us watching it be able to update the order people are eliminted.. obviously I cant but others should be able to 98.209.159.224 (talk) 03:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * We do it later. Brady4mvp (Talk) 03:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Done via the PWTorch report here. -- CW Sensation t 04:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Chavo
Um, Chavo never appeared in the Royal Rumble and according to the list of people who were announced to be in the royal rumble Chavo doesn't fit. Um, isn't this now a problem? Something must have gotten mixed up here...Gamloverks (talk) 03:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

he might not of participated because of the edge/hardy match98.209.159.224 (talk) 03:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * He had been announced on SmackDown, it's unknown what happened and why he wasn't in the match.  TJ   Spyke   03:59, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter now, since that list is not needed any longer.-- TRU    CO   04:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

because Jeff Hardy put him threw a table during Hardy & Edge's match —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.59.4 (talk) 16:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

The Warlord Record
the warlord had a record of 0:02 and now is a new record but santino marrella breaks the warlord record with 0:01 DVG991 7:20 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no source for Marella's time being 1 second. Without a reliable source, no mention will be made.  TJ   Spyke   06:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean besides this one? :D -- CW Sensation t 08:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * How can he last 1 second? Yah it may be announced on the wwe.com, I'll search in his profile and all.  ←Kala  jan→   06:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Knox and Mysterio
editprotected

Re: "Royal Rumble entrances and eliminations" section Mike Knox and Rey Mysterio are listed, on the official WWE site, as having been eliminated by The Big Show, not by each other as this article states Rodericktoombs (talk) 08:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Rodericktoombs
 * Done. -- Scorpion 0422  15:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Just for future reference, that template is if you want to make edits to fully protected pages. This page is semi-protected (maning IP's and acounts less than 4 days old can't edit it). You dd th right thing in requestng the edit here, y jst didn't need the template.  TJ   Spyke   15:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Eliminations and times
What is the source for the elimination times, because they almost all differ to the ones given on WWE.com. Also, Knox and Mysterio were eliminated by the Big Show, and not each other. Surely WWE.com is a more reliable surce than whatever is used. I would change it myself, but I don't have the time, nor do I know how this sort of thing should be cited. King garthur (talk) 13:14, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it is what wwe.com says, but as a wikipedia user, you can't just tell people to do things when you haven't got time. Do it in your sandbox or whatever.  ←Kala  jan→   14:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Event
Is anyone currently typing up what happened in the event section..e.g. how the match started what happened in-between and the end...if not I would be happy to type it..I watched it live..and i know pretty much everything!!--Ruthless-paki (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Who ever has currently typed it up isn't following previous Event style. --WestJet (talk) 02:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

How do you mean?? How should it be?--Ruthless-paki (talk) 11:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

FU in opening paragraph
Why is the FU named as the move in the opening paragraph? WWE no longer calls Cena's finisher the FU, same with the STFU. It's now "The Throwback" and the "STF". --WestJet (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes that is true! I think mostly the reason to change it was becuase WWE is now rated-PG!--Ruthless-paki (talk) 23:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Source for that statement? Not that I don't believe it, but where is the source for it?-- TRU  CO   00:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just look at WWE.com, it's not anywhere on there anymore. http://www.wwe.com/superstars/raw/johncena/bio/ lists his finishers as the "Attitude Adjustment" and the "STF" --WestJet (talk) 07:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

More storylines needed
The background doesn't mention any of the storylines going into the Rumble match. Most importantly it needs to be mentioned that Vince came back and Orton kicked him in the head and rehospitalised him. Otherwise the Aftermath section where it discusses Orton having a mental disorder and Shane McMahon attacking him is completely unprovoked and spontaneous. Also Jericho was fired and re-hired in the weeks leading up to it due to his arrogance to tip off that he may have been in with a chance to win it, also Triple H on SmackDown was being put through the motions by Vickie Guerrero and had his chance put on the line in a match with MVP vs Big Show. Most of this, certainly the first thing, is relevent.

It should also be mentioned that HBK was under the employ of JBL and that he effectively lied down so that JBL could win the Four way contendership match. Otherwise it doesn't make sense why he was an opponent that week but then accompanying JBL to the ring here. Tony2Times (talk) 15:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The only one i'm not sure of is Jericho. That did not end up developing into anything.  TJ   Spyke   18:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression it was just to keep people guessing who was gonna win the Rumble, either that or they weren't sure who to book to win yet. Incidentally, talking of the background storylines a Flickr user was at Raw before the event and has a good picture of JBL & HBK in alliance and a few other less good pics of the contract signing. The more relevent the pics the better, right? Tony2Times (talk) 15:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I released the first one for you. Mshake3 (talk) 05:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)