Talk:Royal Rumble (2017)

Spanish description
The Spanish description on the page should be removed and used for the Spanish language page. It should simply say "30th Annual Royal Rumble pay-per-view (PPV) event. Sammy Maggio (talk) 14:04, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... It's going to be put here anyways and become a proper page to discuss the event. --jbl1975 (talk) 06:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2016
I request that announced competitors in the 2017 Royal Rumble are highlighted by their brand.

Since Goldberg announced his participation it would look like: Goldberg Brock Lesnar Dean Ambrose Mmeah16 (talk) 23:50, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ - that would appear to be contrary to Manual of Style/Accessibility - Arjayay (talk) 09:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2016
82.41.24.102 (talk) 01:28, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  06:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC).

Show how many appearences a certain superstar has in Royal Rumble Matches in total
I think something that has never been put up on a Royal Rumble Wikipedia Page and I think is important and interesting to know is the number of how many Royal Rumbles a certain superstar has entered in total. For example Kane has entered 15+ Royal Rumble Matches. I don't know for sure how many counting with the Fake Diesel and Isaac Yankem but imagine 2017 was like his 20th Rumble, there could be a column showing "20th Royal Rumble Match Appearence" or something close.  SilentWolf2K17 ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source?  JTP ( talk • contribs) 21:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

This is my page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SilentWolf2K17  SilentWolf2K17 ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


 * @User:SilentWolf2K17 appearances are in the Royal Rumble page in the records sections. (Mobile mundo (talk) 18:34, 26 January 2017 (UTC))

That is a really good idea &#35;zeus# (talk) 15:31, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Great idea ! This should definitely be implemented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.135.132.252 (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

What do you think of it
Would you like the new addition ?  SilentWolf2K17 ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Background section
It's really time to ditch the paragraph about the show being based on scripted storylines and predetermined matches, it's patronizing and dumb. Absolutely everyone on earth realizes this, and it's insulting that anyone even feels it belongs Spman (talk) 12:33, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2017

 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  16:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Announced Royal Rumble match participants

 * – Raw
 * – SmackDown
 * – Unassigned

Aghut (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Constant reverting of tagline
If I am correct, the HTML note before all of this reverting happened said something along the lines of. The source was to WWE's official Twitter account, showing an ad for the Royal Rumble that says "Remember the Rumble" and the tweet itself said Remember the Rumble. This looks reliable enough to me.  JTP (talk • contribs) 15:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)


 * So JTP  You are saying that in the beginning of the Hell in a Cell 2016 PPV ””Triple Main Event”” is the tagline and ””One vs all”” is the tagline for the Royal Rumble 2016 PPV because its featured on the advertisements? BabyIamdaman (talk) 18:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I guarantee that I am not the only one thinking this when I say "Triple Main Event", no, but "One vs All", yes.  JTP (talk • contribs) 18:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

As this is a subject of a talk discussion now please do not remove it again, has provided a vailid source so there is no vaild reason to remove it. Chris "WarMachineWildThing"  Talk to me 18:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, this talk of "It has to be on the poster for it to count", while I don't agree with that statement, what people aren't realizing is the official poster hasn't been released yet. That's a custom poster in the infobox. Every month someone, probably the same person, uploads a custom poster and inevitably it gets changed once the real poster goes up on WWEShop. I've never agreed with the custom poster use. OldSkool01 (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Please note BabyIamdaman has been confirmed as a sock puppet here Chris "WarMachineWildThing"  Talk to me 03:42, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2017/Goldberg
189.241.178.102 (talk) 01:25, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Announced Royal Rumble match participants
 * – Raw
 * – SmackDown
 * – Unaffiliated


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not Done Unclear of what your requesting. Chris "WarMachineWildThing"  Talk to me 02:00, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I think the only difference is that Goldberg is no longer listed as a RAW superstar. Since he isn't listed as member of the RAW roster on WWE's site it would make sense to list with no affiliation.Drn211 (talk) 03:59, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Still not Done As he only appears on RAW there would have to be a consensus for that change as it has been the subject of edit warring over the last few weeks. Chris "WarMachineWildThing"  Talk to me 04:10, 24 January 2017 (UTC)


 * A tad late, but just wanted to make note that when Foley named his top three guys from Raw to win the Rumble, Goldberg was one of them. -- JDC808  ♫  02:32, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I can remember a handful of disputes where you argued that we had to take what WWE.com says as gospel. While I disagree in principle, utterances by Foley (who sometimes doesn't know the city he's in) are not enough to contradict the draft status given there. Str1977 (talk) 17:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC)


 * As gospel? No. Foley didn't state it on Raw. He stated it in a pre-recorded video where he probably had cue cards telling him what to say. -- JDC808  ♫  20:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * "As gospel? No." Okay, let me quote you on that the next time WWE.com decides to change the way they refer to their top championship two or three times a week.
 * Besides the fact that many other reliable sources were reporting it as well (in reference to the title name change). I guess you forgot that. -- JDC808  ♫  22:25, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The exact details of the Foley statement are beside the point. It's not something one should base anything on. Str1977 (talk) 22:02, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

I am hereby restating that the only reliable source that has been brought forth (http://www.wwe.com/superstars/goldberg) has Goldberg as an unafiliated, undrafted wrestler. Hence, he shouldn't be listed as a Raw-branded wrestler. I haven't seen any valid arguments against this, certainly none based in sources. Str1977 (talk) 20:24, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2017
please change

(Table of participants)

to 141.19.230.29 (talk) 09:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  10:16, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Undertaker
I know that Undertaker storyline wise proclaimed he goes where he wants, when he wants, because he can...but given that his last few appearances have been on Raw, and given what his future itinerary holds, reality would say that Taker's gonna be a fixture on the red brand at least until Mania.

Thus he should be listed as Raw for the purposes of this list. Vjmlhjds (talk) 13:56, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

He made his return on Smackdown as a part of Smackdown before SS, then goes to RAW he says he goes where he wants when he wants, He's appeared on both just leave it as it is. It just gonna start another edit war. To be honest the coloring for each wrestler personally I think is silly. Secondly, that card you linked from 411 is not set in stone yet and is just rumored. He's also rumored to fight Cena at WrestleMania who is on Smackdown. Chris "WarMachineWildThing"  Talk to me 22:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

The source you provided is clearly says it's a rumour which wikipedia doesn't allow as a source, as per WP:RUMOUR. Plus, the WWE website doesn't list him as a Raw superstar. TheDeviantPro (talk) 23:15, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Since he made 2 appearances on Raw pre Rumble, and given the events of the Rumble, it looks fairly evident that Taker's business will be on the red brand for awhile. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:34, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Whether or not Taker stays on Raw going forward is irrelevent. This page is only describing the facts as of January 29, 2017. And the facts are that The Undertaker is not listed on any specific brand page on WWE.com, as of the day of the Rumble. If Taker comes out on Raw tonight and says that he is now officially on Raw, it doesn't retroactively change the fact that on the day of the Rumble he was still not an official member of any brand. OldSkool01 (talk) 23:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


 * A tad late in responding to this, but when Mick Foley made his three predictions of who from Raw would win the Rumble, The Undertaker was not one of them. Foley named Goldberg, Lesnar, and Strowman as his top three picks from Raw. If Undertaker was considered part of Raw, I find it hard to believe he was not in Foley's top three. -- JDC808  ♫  02:28, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * While there is no basis to call Undertaker a Raw wrestler (his WWE.com profile leaves him undrafted) this reasoning this beyond comprehension. What the questionable character played by Mick Foley says on TV, hardly can be a basis for claims one way or the other. More so, what Foley DOESN'T SAY. Str1977 (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * PS. Taker's appearences on RAW would be an argument against him being a Smackdown-branded wrestler. However, he has never been called that by anyone (only calling the blue show his home). WWE.com has him undrafted and hence there is no contradiction between his official status and his appearing on Raw. Str1977 (talk) 20:26, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Big difference is that Taker has appeared on SmackDown since after the draft and explicitly stated that "he goes where he wants". -- JDC808  ♫  20:44, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * He has. And while I would not give too much on such sound bites, it is in line with his status on WWE.com. So no reason to put him in any brand. We actually agree on the conclusion, just not on any argument brought forth. Str1977 (talk) 21:53, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Sami Zayn
Why is Sami Zayn listed as eighth? If there are any confirmed numbers, it's needs to be sourced. I did a quick search and it yielded nothing. Mr. C.C. Hey yo!I didn't do it! 02:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Because he drew #8 live on the PPV. Chris "WarMachineWildThing"  Talk to me 02:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Attendance
With 52.020 sold tickets in attendance for this 2017 Royal Rumble, this number actually marked the 2nd largest Royal Rumble crowd ever in the storied history  (31st anniversary) of this event, after the Royal Rumble of 1997 which took place some 20 years ago in the very same venue with some 60k+ in attendance. This also deserves to be mentioned in the article with regards to the statistics of this momentous event. This slightly smaller number can be attributed primarily to the enormous entrance stage set that is used these days which consumes a lot of space compared to the much simpler and smaller entrances of the mid 1990s  era. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.135.132.252 (talk) 01:51, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2017
the match between john and aj is unclear and i want to add description to the pre-show matches Rekzbossyt the johncena (talk) 17:25, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Padlock-dash2.svg Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request.  JTP (talk • contribs) 20:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Royal Rumble (2017)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Royal Rumble (2017)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Smackdown12062016": From James Ellsworth (wrestler):  From TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs (2016): </li> </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 02:56, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

unannounced participants

 * In regards to the relevancy of notating the unannounced participants. Wikipedia is supposed to be presentable to all readers, i.e., those familiar and unfamiliar with the topic. It is relevant to notate them for unfamiliar readers. -- JDC808  ♫  20:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Why is it relevant for them? I don't see this happening in other Rumbles and all recent Rumbles had a large share of unannounced participants. IMO surprise returns and the likes are relevant (though that's rather a matter for the match description and not for the list) but the fact that e.g. Enzo Amore took part without being announced beforehand is not really noteworthy. He's an active, major wrestler so why shouldn't he be a part. His inclusion was not a surprise nor was it of any great importance to the match. He was just filler. That's why he wasn't announced. Participants like Tye Dillinger (but more for his entry number) and Roman Reigns (due to the backlash/controversy) might be relevant but not people like Enzo.
 * PS. I miss the Royal Rumble Report. Str1977 (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Sheamus and Cesaro did not have 2 eliminations each
The problem is you have Sheamus and Cesaro both with 2 eliminations. They eliminated the new day together (3 guys) just moments before they were eliminated themselves. They should have 3 eliminations combined. Right now you have a total number of 30 eliminations - 29 were only eliminated. This is your mistake. You change this to 3 eliminations between both men instead of 4 and you have the correct elimination count.
 * Wrong, the same rule applies for Royal Rumble (2002). This is the correct elimination number.  Nickag 989 talk 09:41, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Roman Reigns negation?
Shouldn't we mention the negative fan and critic reception regarding Reigns' entrant at #30 and elimination of the Undertaker? It's possibly the most talked about part of the event and it's mentioned in Persona and Reception of Roman Reigns. Solitude6nv5 (talk) 11:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)