Talk:WWE One Night Stand/Archive 1

Actual name?
According to this page on WWE.com's website regarding Tazz and Heyman's ECW AONS announcement, the event is still being refered to as One Night Stand (or "another One Night Stand," with the word "another" apparently being kept out of the title). I'm not suggesting we change this page just yet, as it very well could turn out to be called Another One Night Stand. I imagine we'll find out tonight for sure when the announcement is televised on RAW. Just something to keep in mind. Jeff Silvers 23:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * ...Did I just miss the announcement last night, or was one not made? Because I seemed to remember hearing that Tazz was going to repeat the announcement last night on RAW (perhaps they meant he'd repeat it on SmackDown!, which would seem to make more sense anyway). Jeff Silvers 01:32, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * They've done almost nothing to promote the show at this point, since they're far too busy with Wrestlemania 22 and Saturday Night's Main Event. I suspect we'll see more of an "official" push once both those events are over, just like the ONS show last year wasn't pushed much until after WM21. BronzeWarrior 09:26, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * WWE has released an official poster for the event now. I won't get into details about what the poster contains because it actually contains major spoilers, but I will say that it confirms the event is called ECW One Night Stand 2.  I think the article title should now be changed to reflect this. Jeff Silvers 01:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * ...Oh. Apparently that poster was a fake.  Well damn. Jeff Silvers 13:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, go to WWE.com and see the ECW ONS ticket commercial. It's the same logo/name as last year.


 * Great move to ONS 2006 whoever did that. Really good thinking. I'm very happy with that. Normy 08:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

RVD
RVD said that his wwe title shot would be extreme so therefore (un)officially he has agreed to use it at ECW:ONS.

Steve Corino
I took Steve Corino off of the list of people slated to appear, as he his self has stated that he has not been contacted nor does he intend to appear.

Help
Someone wanna fix the image on the page so that the Image: and the 200px things don't show above and below it? The Phenomenal One 05:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry about this but I've removed it, it's fake. Apparently, ringsidemayhem took the poster made by a guy called Alldawson from this graphics battle on the Extreme Warfare Battleground and posted it up as real. --Oakster 08:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

RVD
I don't thimk this should be posted until the match is outright confirmed by the WWE. I'm gonna delete it until it's absolutley confirmed.KE

"Confirmed Matches"
Unless you hear something official on WWE TV or on WWE.com, do not go posting any rumored matches...I know RVD's been hinting what he's gonna do with his briefcase, but nothing official has actually been said. The Phenomenal One 05:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

i dont see why Wikipedia cant have rumoured matches,especially when RVD almost confirmed it. but ofcourse,it should only be done when it has been hinted at.and who made the rule that we cannot have rumours on wrestler biographies? its an encyclopedia after all right? its not like were supposed to stick to the world of WWE. Lord revan 20:51, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It's quite simple. It's because the match hasn't been confirmed by any sources, only hinted at. And WWE hints at many things we want (a Shane-O-Mac face turn), that don't happen. And Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, deals in fact, not rumor. Darryl Hamlin 14:40, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Something Interesting
I read this on Rajah.com, with PWTorch being the source:

Source: Pro Wrestling Torch Newsletter

The current plan for the upcoming ECW PPV in June is for Rob Van Dam to cash in his Money in the Bank contract against John Bradshaw Layfield for the World Heavyweight championship. This scenario requires Rey Mysterio to drop the title to JBL before the show. RVD has yet to announce who he will face for their title and would not do so until after the title change. Challenging JBL for his title would require RVD to jump to SmackDown.

There had been previous talk about having RVD face the winner of Sunday's Backlash main event. However, there is an issue with Van Dam facing each of the three possible opponents. Triple H is on the verge of turning face and getting such major negative heat on him conflicts with that. John Cena also doesn't need that negativity while he's already fighting on a weekly basis for the fans approval. Edge has little history with RVD and minimal history with ECW. Edge's only history with ECW was appearing at last year's One Night Stand PPV as part of the anti-ECW crusaders. The leader of that pack was John Bradshaw Layfield. He was the most outspoken about ECW last year and it is expected that his tirade will pick up once again very shortly, making him the perfect target for RVD.

I don't know if that can be included somewhere in the article, but I figured I'd bring it to everyone's attention. The Styles Clash 00:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

It shouldn't really be included if for no other reason then the fact there's conflicting reports, in particular PWInsider who are still heavily claiming it'll be against whoever has the WWE title. Though JBL is more realistic (plus sensible) and as far as I've seen certain people on PWInsider are extremely against admitting they were wrong, so they'll probably keep claiming it's going to be for the WWE title until they can find a source who'll tell them WWE changed their plans which'll give them an excuse to change the story. --Kiltman67 18:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see why they don't just keep the World Heavyweight title on Mysterio until ONS and have RVD challenge him. Mysterio has history with ECW so it would make sense for him to participate (as he did last year). Jeff Silvers 00:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The common response to that seems to be that they want a clear cut heel for RVD to face, or Cena since it's pretty safe to expect he'd get booed out of the building by the ECW fans. I kind of think that it's a shame since if Mysterio went out there on top form, unlike last year, he and RVD would have a match that the ECW audience would love, and in the unlikely event of Mysterio retaining it could perhaps give some credibility to his reign. --Kiltman67 04:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

New poster
I replaced the old image with a newer one that features a bloodstain and a caption that reads, "EXTREME PAY-PER-VIEW FROM THE ORIGINAL EXTREME BRAND" (most likely added to the poster to emphasize the fact that ECW is now a full-fledged WWE brand). Jeff Silvers 21:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I uploaded a new image based on the old one - the new one had a rather unsightly watermark and was a PNG when it should have been a JPEG. If you find a new one without the watermark, replace the one I uploaded with it. --Jtalledo (talk) 22:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Do not add unconfirmed matches
We all read the wrestling sites, we go to house shows, we read forums, we all know about the rumors and possibilities for the show, but if it has NOT been officially confirmed by WWE, then it does NOT belong in the article. We all read the rumor sites, we know there was a video promo at some house show hyping Sabu vs Mysterio at ONS, but until it is officially confirmed on WWE.com, or on Raw or Smackdown, it has no place in the article. Wikipedia deals in confirmable facts, anything else doesnt count. DemonWeb 16:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I would like to further point out that, in accordance with Wikipedia's policy on kayfabe, matches officially announced at television tapings should not be listed until the show has aired. Jeff Silvers 18:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I just deleted the World Title match. It was announced at the SD tapings this week but won't air on TV on Friday in America. TJ Spyke 18:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It is still there. i have tryed to go to the page to delete the rey sabu match but on the edit page it doesn't show up. yet it is still seen on the main page. why is this
 * Try refreshing or clearing your cache, its not on the article page anymore, and dont forget to sign your posts. DemonWeb 20:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * People continue to keep trying and add it, are these people too stupid to understand what "DO NOT list matches until they are officially announced on television" means? TJ Spyke 22:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I dont think we even have to ask that question XD. They'll keep adding it regardless, we'll keep deleting it regardless. DemonWeb 22:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I just added and deleted the world title match for you guys.


 * Should the page be locked to unregistered users for a period of time? It might help. Normy 05:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I would disagree. This should be treated as an exception. It doesn't ruin anything for people who haven't seen the show yet, as it is not part of an agle or storyline, it is just an announcement, and it is also an official announcement. I also don't believe it breaks kayfabe in any way, so there should be no problem. It is not speculation, as it has been recorded as being officially announced. No speculation or disscusion of the match has been made, just that it will happen.

Chrispy 14:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I say it should be locked. Its policy that it should not listed until its officially announced, regardless of if it will be in a few days or not. Until it appears on WWE.com or airs on television, its not 'official'.DemonWeb 13:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I just saw a commercial for One Night Stand which advertised a Rey vs. Sabu match, a bWo vs. FBI match, and a Super Crazy vs. Psichosis vs. Tajiri vs. Mikey Whipwreck match.

I guess they are all official.

That advertisement must have been in New York City since they aren't airing nationally. I think this page should be locked from unregistered users since they are the ones who keep adding matches that haven't been announced on TV yet. TJ Spyke 22:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. We need to make sure there is evidence before matches are added.Yugioh73036 00:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Yugioh73036

Well I guess I can add it because it just aired today on SmackDown. I live in Canada(thats ur neighbor the the north) an WWE SmackDown airs on the regular thursday. I believe that counts as airing on t.v., unless the input of a Canadian means nothing.User:Killswitch Engage

From what i've seen they usually mean based on when they air in the US. TJ Spyke 04:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine u can erase ill just laugh and say "I told ya so" when its confirmed.User:Killswitch Engage
 * I dont know where you live exactly Killswitch, but i'm in Canada as well, and it airs on Friday for me. Either way, we ALL know it'll be confirmed, the point is its not to be added until Friday night when the show airs for everyone, thats the point. DemonWeb 04:29, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Nobody is arguing that the match won't be announced, Killswitch. We're just following an established Wikipedia guideline. Jeff Silvers 05:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I live in Edmonton,Alberta.Go Oilers Go!!!!!!!User:Killswitch Engage p.s. i dont have the U.S.A. network maybe thats why
 * I dont have USA either ( I dont think Smackdown airs on USA ), I watch it on UPN, and it airs Fridays, meh. As Jeff and I both said, we know the match will be announced, and will be official, but its policy that its not added to the page until that happens.DemonWeb 14:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Now that it's official we don't have to keep removing it. This is just gonna keep happening though with announcements made on SD, i'll keep an eye out for people doing this though. TJ Spyke 00:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I wish Smackdown was live, then we wouldnt have to deal with this for half a week before the shows official air-time. DemonWeb 00:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, every person I have talked too has agreed that SD would be a better show in general if it was live. TJ Spyke 00:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I too wish SD was live. It'll get them further away from B-Show status. Perry 01:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like people will now try adding the Lawler/Tazz match. Until they either announce it on Raw or at wwe.com it's not officially a match. TJ Spyke 01:45, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point, forgot that he still has to accept it haha. I guess we're in for another few days of hell.DemonWeb 01:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Matches and Talent
If a wrestler's name is already in the matches section (e.g. Cena, RVD, Mysterio) does their name really need to be in the talent page? Why can't we put in brackets something like Mick Foley & Edge (representing WWE) vs. Tommy Dreamer & Terry Funk (representing ECW)? Normy 06:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Mysterio respresenting ECW?
It appears somebody moved Mysterio from the "Representing WWE" column into the main roster of the event (which appears to be reserved for ECW-brand wrestlers). Any reason for this, seeing as how he is still on the SmackDown! roster? Jeff Silvers 15:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Your right Rey Mysterio is still on smackdown but Paul Heyman has offered him a contract to jump to ECW.

T-shirt matches
Please do not add FBI/Tajiri & Crazy or Mahoney/Tanaka until they are officially announced by WWE. Being listed on a T-shirt does not make them official, and WWE has since pulled that shirt, anyway. Jeff Silvers 03:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi all, TV reports tell that on Smackdown! tonight, the Tajiri & Super Crazzy Vs. FBI will be made offical. Watch for that during Super Crazzy's match. After it airs, then it can be added to this site.

Mahoney vs. Tanaka was not mention, so it may or may not happen as a bonus match at the PPV. --4.250.21.70 21:13, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Will they count the victory of rvd
i am currently wondering your thoughts on wether they will count the victory since paul heyman counted the 1-2-3 insted of a ref....i am currently 50-50 because part of me says that it will count but the old undisputed title will come back setting up cena edge at vengence and part of me says no because the wwe is gay like that and on monday night raw vince will come out with john cena and state that it doesnt count and cena is still the camp therefore setting the stage for the mcmahon(s)/cena vs "new-old" D-X (Triple H/HBK) just my opinion not a spoiler or w/e just my thoughts.....what do you guys and gals think.......~Jesse

They already said on wwe.com that if RVD won he would have to defend the title against Edge at Vengeance. Add in the fact that Vince would not let his WWE Title be renamed the ECW Title and i'm willing to bet that Edge will win the title at Vengeance. TJ Spyke 03:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Honestly I don't really know. I'm thinking theyre gonna have a rematch or give John Cena his title since "RVD won the 'ECW' title" and Edge has No. 1 contendership to the "WWE Championship" setting the stage for Vengeance. But I have no evidence to support my claim so I'll jus watch RAW and ECW to see how it plays out. Slapslapslap 04:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)]]

my title therory
tonight vince will make a new wwe title and have a battle royal for it stting up cena/edge at vengance and RVD will rechristen the "old" wwe title the ECW title tommorrow night

Chants
Im pretty sure i heard some Fuck you Cena chants so im gonna add it. User:Killswitch Engage

Do we even need a chants section? It just looks more like clutter to me and I doubt most people care about the chants that were made. Maybe it could be trimmed down to about 4 or 5. TJ Spyke 21:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The chants section is a bit extensive, but ECW is well known for the crowds chants. Id suggest maybe reorganizing the list and group similar chants/chants giving to specific wrestlers thoughout the night. It'll shorten the list visually, without really messing it up. DemonWeb 01:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Ive shortened the list down to about half, leaving pretty much just the more memorable chants from the event. Any opinions? DemonWeb 23:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Can't sleep, clowns will eat me deleted the chants and I agree with his edit. This stuff is largely unverifiable to the user and it's notable enough to be included. A few could be mentioned as prose in the overview to describe how the crowd was. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Hepatitis?
Just a curiousity, but why did the crowd chant Hepatitis at Randy Orton? ~ Punk2h8tshun

Because his father, "Cowboy" Bob Orton, has hepatitis. Cowboy Bob got released from WWE after he bled during his match with The Undertaker at Armageddon(John Laurenitis know this but allowed the match to happen anyways). TJ Spyke 21:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, didn't research hard enough for that one. Thanks, TJ. ~ Punk2h8tshun

WWE talking on John Cena
It kinda sucked when Edge came and speared John Cena. People wanted to see John get beat cleanly to prove he sucks. When I looked on John's profile that's all they will say about that match that he got cheated and blah blah blah.

I think we need to add the chants section backKotenks 00:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do, but except some fankid Cena mark to change it back, then have the Mods agree with them over neutrality & POV. Even though Cena IS the Heel in an ECW Show.

2007?
I don't think there's going to be a 2007 because ECW has came back so I dont think the new ECW is going to have ECW One Night Stand.--Yowiki 02:53, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes there will be a one night stand 2007, it has been confirmed on the WWE corporate website. .--User:JonWalkers 21:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

well thats kinda stupid when you think about it cause ya boy Yowiki at 03:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The ppv is confirmed to happen but will it be renamed now given the fact that ECW is back full time? I doubt they will use the name One Night Stand for this event again User:JoeyStyles
 * Technically it didn't make sense to call it that this year either, but they did. We don't know if they will rename it next year. TJ Spyke 00:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I've been seeing many, and I mean MANY sites, that say Vince MIGHT hold a WCW One Night Stand 2007, instead of an ECW One Night Stand. 24.57.39.138 03:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Doubtful. Besides, as of right now WWE's affiliated site says ECW. TJ Spyke 03:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

ONS 1 Ending
Please don't remove the ending of ONS 1, where Eric Bsichoff was attacked. It was built up the entire show, and was very important. In fact, the brawl and Bischoff hating ECW was build up for WEEKS prior to the event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BuyAMountain (talk • contribs)

2007location
The consensus on WP is to only use official info from WWE for locations. Unless you have a source from a WWE site (wwe.com, WWE's corporate website, or the WWE Affiliates site), do not change the location. TJ Spyke 01:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Some sites, like PWInsider and Wrestling Observer are considered highly reliable, so I don't see why they can't be used as sources in the future. BuyAMountain 02:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Because they aren't always reliable, and it's been agreed not to use their "info" for PPV's. It's a moot issue though since the WWE Affiliates website has noew updated with the info. TJ Spyke 02:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Name change
I was just reading that because of the recent change to PPV formats to start having all brands be featured on all future WWE PPV's that the name of the PPV may be changed to WWE One Night Stand, should we make note of this? TonyFreakinAlmeida 21:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless WWE annnounces it, no. We don't add rumors and speculation. TJ Spyke 21:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Now that the poster came out it pretty much confirms that it will be called "WWE One Night Stand".-- bullet  proof  3:16 23:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

ECW One Night Stand → WWE One Night Stand — No longer an ECW PPV. Mshake3 21:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Add  # Support   or   # Oppose   on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~ .  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in opposition to the move

 * 1) Oppose until it is formally announced weeks prior to the event in commercials, TV, and advertisements. -- bullet  proof  3:16 00:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments:


 * Would you care to explain why? TJ Spyke 21:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The event is still called ECW One Night Stand by WWE (the same way WWE Backlash and WWE No Way Out, etc.) TJ Spyke 21:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.wwe.com/schedules/events/eventdetail/?id=4362482 : "WWE Presents "One Night Stand" "Featuring the Superstars of Raw, SmackDown and ECW!"


 * If the 2007 event is renamed, perhaps the articles should be split. 2005 and 2006 were anomalies to an extent - no brand divisions, larger numbers of outside talent, unusually small locations, little in the way of an announced card - whereas it seems likely that the 2007 event will be more or less a standard WWE pay-per-view. McPhail 00:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Souled Out is under one page. Mshake3 01:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That was always a WCW PPV though. That was when the nWo gimmick was still the hottest thing in wrestling (it even cause them to start branding ALL of the pay-per-views as "WCW/nWo" instead of just "WCW". TJ Spyke 01:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And that's why all of those PPVs are on one page, which is why all three One Night Stand PPVs will be on the same page. Mshake3 01:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No split. The Great American Bash isn't split, neither should this. kelvSYC 04:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the move request should wait until whether we know for sure if "ECW" will be in the name. TJ Spyke 00:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And why doesn't this count? Mshake3 01:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The whole problem is that the third WWE brand is another acronym, instead of similar to the other brands (being RAW and Smackdown). "WWE ECW One Night Stand" is just too much of a mouthful. I personally would just do WWE One Night Stand, as they were WWE PPV's. But, I agree with TJ: wait until we know if ONS 2007 has ECW in the name. Anakinjmt 15:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And once that happens, maybe everyone will see my point about how ECW is a crucial part of the PPV name, not the promotion. Mshake3 17:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The way I see it, it's the same situation as WWE Backlash or WWE No Way Out. TJ Spyke 21:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you tell me why it's the same situation, despite the fact that in 2005, ECW wasn't a promotion nor a brand? Mshake3 01:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What I mean is, it's like how the name of certain other PPV's have "WWE" at the beginning (like WWE No Mercy), this one has "ECW" at the start. It doesn't need to be used in the articlw though. TJ Spyke 01:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Look closely. For a show like No Mercy, you could say it's "WWE presents No Mercy" or "Smackdown presents No Mercy". Or going back to sports, you say "The NFL presents Super Bowl XVI." Now of course, you don't include the company name, which was agreed on. However, for ONS (in 2005 and possibly 2006), you can't say "ECW presents One Night Stand" because ECW isn't promoting anything. The name is technically "WWE presents ECW One Night Stand." And this naming issue of the previous events becomes more important this year when the ECW name is dropped from the 2007 edition. Mshake3 01:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe these official releases from WWE best show my point. Mshake3 01:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Seeing as The Great American Bash doesn't have WWE or WCW in front of it, can't we just call this One Night Stand? Davnel03 17:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * That'll probably happen. This argument was more of a semi unrelated tagent as I've been editing the article to show the correct name for the first two years (and I now have proof from WWE), but I've been reverted everytime. Mshake3 19:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * We can't do that. If you click on "One Night Stand", you will see that an article already exists there. So there needs to be a dismbig link. TJ Spyke 21:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way is there a proposed move going on at December to Dismember from ECW December to Dismember > WWE December to Dismember? There should be. Davnel03 17:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well that one should be at December to Dismember since there's no other use for that name outside of the wrestling PPVs. Mshake3 17:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * It's for clarification though, and also to keep everything in one format. Anakinjmt 18:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The format is to not include the promotion name except for ambig reasons. Ambig. is not needed for D2D. Mshake3 18:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. --Stemonitis 14:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It's pretty obvious that this is a WWE PPV this year and not an ECW only which would make little sense to still call it an ECW PPV. Let alone ECW isn't even a promotion and a brand. The first 2 years it was a reunion show/spring board into the brand. This year its a legit WWE PPV so it should be names WWE One Night Stand. Also it clearly states it on the poster. This should be a given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.70.133 (talk • contribs)


 * Yeah, it's called "WWE One Night Stand" THIS year, but how does that change the fact that the first two were ECW-branded PPVs? You just can't lump them all together.  WWE now owns all of the old NWA/WCW Great American Bash events, but that page doesn't say "WWE Great American Bash," because different companies have promoted it.  This is the EXACT same thing, and it'll happen later in the year with December to Dismember when that's WWE-branded as well.  You wouldn't call the ORIGINAL ECW event "WWE December to Dismember" because that's just blatantly inaccurate.  65.189.210.173 12:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, the article is called WWE One Night Stand for ambig reasons. The only other option is separate articles, which probably would be frowed upon. The December to Dismember page will probably have no initials since it's a unique name. Mshake3

Ring announcer
Who was the ring announcer for ECW One Night Stand 2006?? Derrty2033 06:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Long time ring announcer Stephen DeAngelis (who was originally hired to be the ring announcer for the ECW brand as well before WWE decided to use Justin Roberts). TJ Spyke 06:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks!!Derrty2033 07:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Blue Meanie
I'm pretty sure Vince isn't really going to face the Blue Meanie. The stipulatios is now that Lashley will get Vince in a street fight, assuming he defeats all his opponents tonight. So either keep it as Lashley v. Vince or leave it blank until RAW is over.
 * 1)Yes I doubt it is really the Meanie, but that is who Vince said. 2)They didn't say who Lashley would face, it could be Shane (since it was Shane who said it was on). Also, Lashley has to win some matches tonight to even qualify. TJ Spyke 01:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Lashley
Lashley will Vince McMahon at WWE One Night Stand 2007 World Wrestling Entertainment©

WWE One Night Stand 2007
On the page, it says Edge vs TBD in a steel cage match. But on lordsofpain.net or other websites, it says that Batista will face Edge at One Night Stand as he won a fatal- four way match on Smackdown! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Jack Hardy (talk • contribs)
 * We don't include spoilers on this page. Edge's opponent isn't officially known yet. I have removed the winners name in your comment for the same reason. TJ Spyke 20:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * For the record, Wikipedia policy on talk pages is that you shouldn't edit another user's comments unless there are certain circumstances involved (none of which is that the comment might spoil a TV show). Jeff Silvers 16:28, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I put it back, although the spoilers rule should apply to the talkpage as well. TJ Spyke 21:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * it should be batista until you hear that wwe decide to change it for whatever reason and then you can change it Jsarg93 19:20 25 May 2007
 * No it shouldn't. That's spoiler information which, as far as I'm aware, is not allowed under Wiki rules. References to Edge's opponent should be removed until Smackdown has aired, just as references to a steel cage match should be removed until that is announced. 204.62.140.201 17:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Not Wiki rules, but WP:PW guideline. Matches/announcments are not to be added until they are aired on US TV or announced on the companies official website (wwe.com for WWE and tnawrestling.com for TNA). TJ Spyke 00:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

ONS 2006- RVD's MitB
It should be written that John Cena vs. RVD match was Rvd's Cash in match —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeskh4 (talk • contribs)

Edge vs. Batista
Where was it announced that Edge and Batista will face each other in a Steel Cage Match at ONS2007? michaelclarkc 18:15 May 25th 2007
 * It wasn't announced. Someone jumped the gun and, through use of spoilers, added it to the card. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.62.140.201 (talk • contribs)

Go to the SNME wiki page and there are three announced matches and the source is a promo poster on in toronto where i got my info from so thats a source if some expirienced wiki guy has put it up why shouldnt i mention One Night Stand

Saturday Night Main Event ***Spoiler Alert***
The promotion poster for Saturday nights main event was put up last Thursday and it says that it will be Edge & MVP Vs. Batista & Chris Beniot and it will be the last time both champions face each other before there matches at One Night Stand.

Meaning MVP Vs. Benoit ( Not a spoiler if WWE has put up like hundreds of posters advertising it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.225.112.163 (talk • contribs)
 * I am not seeing any promo poster on WWE's websites and rumored posters floating around on "news" sites are not acceptably. What is your source? Besides, that wouldn't be an announcment anyways. TJ Spyke 05:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I saw a poster the same poster used to get information for the wiki SNME page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.225.112.163 (talk • contribs)
 * No you didn't. The info on the SNME page came from a PR, which only had text. TJ Spyke 05:53, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Pudding Match
Even though the match is not for the belt, shouldn't Melina still be recognized as the Women's Champion? 24.89.69.22 20:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It was agreed a long time ago that we don't list titles unless they are on the line in the match. Since the Women's Title won't be on the line, we don't mention it. TJ Spyke 20:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Lumberjack Match
TJ, if you're looking for an official announcement, look here http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/55145/Another-Match-Added-To-WWE-One-Night-Stand-Card.htm

Plus it has been added to WWE.com's One Night Stand page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiWikiBoi (talk • contribs)
 * 1)That's not an official announcment (unless 411mania.com was purchased by WWE last night). 2)It is NOT on WWE's One Night Stand site (which you would know if you had checked it first). No such match has been announced on TV or wwe.com, so it will be removed everytime someone adds it. TJ Spyke 21:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Here you go it right on the offical page. http://www.wwe.com/shows/ecw/shows1/onenightstand/ read it and weep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.104.109 (talk • contribs)
 * Why do so many IP's think they are right? I read the spoilers every week, but the policy (the same one we've had for a LONG time and has a warning on every PPV page) is that we don't add matches until they are announced on US TV or the companies website. The match wasn't was only announced on US TV last night, after WikiWikiBoy made his edit. So, I will allow you to tuck your tail between your legs and pretend this didn't happen. (BTW, don't give me and "Don't bite the newcomers", I am just having some fun with someone who thinks they are one-upping me). TJ Spyke 00:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

you have a very serious fucked up problem man this match has been on the site for at least 5 days so dont say it was just announced last night —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.104.109 (talk • contribs)
 * Why are the trolls attracted to wrestling articles. It was NOT on wwe.com before Friday night. Not stop insulting me and BSing me before you get blocked. TJ Spyke 20:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

hey dont call me a troll buddy! fuck off! ok i wont not stop insulting u its spelled Now dumb ass learn to spell. Oh and i didnt attack you. you attacked me by calling me a troll! and i was one upping you need to get your facts straight just because youve made 30000+ entries does not make you almighty. Get a Life Nerd! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.104.109 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep it up, you won't last long on WP acting like that. The match was not added on WWE's website until Friday night, we don't add spoilers here. TJ Spyke 00:06, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Im done with you have a nice life __l__ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.35.104.109 (talk • contribs)
 * Some people just never learned how to admit that they are wrong. For the record, the match itself was ANNOUNCED on Smackdown, then added to WWE.com. There was no announcement prior to their Smackdown encounter on WWE.com (unless you count the spoilers). It was right to have been kept off until Friday night.Garistotle 13:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

FCA Match
What's wrong with mentioniong that submissions don't count? Koberulz 03:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The fact that it's "Pinfalls Count Anywhere" makes it pretty clear IMO. TJ Spyke 04:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The fact that I had to look it up on WWE.com to make sure editing it to "Falls Count Anywhere" was correct, which it wasn't, says otherwise. Koberulz 09:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Obvious though it may sound, the phrase "Pinfalls Count Anywhere" doesn't inherently imply that submissions won't result in a fall. In fact, until hearing Cena mention it on RAW, I hadn't even realized it. In addition, specifically noting that submissions don't count is important in the historical perspective due to Cena's "controversial" submission victory over Khali at Judgment Day that led to this rematch. Jeff Silvers 22:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

lumber jacks
I just saw The WWE Experience and the graphic showed that the lumberjacks are: Chavo Guerrero, Deuce, Domino, Boogeyman, finaly, the miz, shannon moore, paul and brain, snitsky, carlito, masters, Balls Mahoney, kenny, shad, JGT, Viscera , Val Venis, nitro, Brett Major, Brian Major. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.225.114.163 (talk • contribs)
 * We will see if that ends up being true or not. TJ Spyke 21:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * i saw that too, but anything can change between now and ONS so best too leave it at the moment Cradle666 13:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Cena's Reaction
We should include Cena's reaction at ONS 2. It was 100% negative to the point of near riot. Also the reaction was noted many times on WWE by many different people. Cena, JR, Lawler, Heyman and RVD are just a few who noted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.21.121 (talk • contribs)
 * Not notable in my opinion. Alot of wrestlers got a negative reaction at the event, Eugene who was also face at the time was booed. If it was going to be noted it should be in John Cena's article Don.-.J 18:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Promotional Poster Content
I can't understand what the big dispute is. Instead of edit warring further, let's discuss it here. Gavyn Sykes 21:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that this new user says it is OR to say who is on the poster even though the poster is right there. First he claimed that only Lashley was on the poster (even though it is clearly both Lashley and Cor Von), then when I said he was just Lashley he still reverted. I have even given him proof that wwe.com says Lashley is on the poster . TJ Spyke 21:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It is definately both Lashley and Cor Von. I suppose, technically, without a source, it being Cor Von's as well as OR. But i think WP:Ignore All Rules applies here.

At the least, Blue Shrek, stop editing it to remove the poster info altogether. Gavyn Sykes 22:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm totally confused. The post clearly has one face on it. How are people claiming that there are two different people on the poster? (we are talking about Image:OnenightstandDVDcover.jpg, right?) Is someone saying that the two faces were photoshopped together? Or that because the left side of the face is lit up with a red light and scrunched up that it is actually a different face from the right side that isn't as scrunched up and under more normal lighting? It isn't obvious to me, a casual viewer, that there are two people in this poster. The WWE site lists this under Lashley's merchandise, so I accept that it is his face, but how on earth are people claiming that another face is in the poster? That definately needs a citation.-Andrew c [talk] 22:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You are saying that doesn't look like Marcus Cor Von on the left? To me, it seems like they morphed their faces together (like they morphed Vince McMahon and Shane McMahon's faces for the WWF Invasion poster). BlueShrek reverted even when I said it was just Lashley though. TJ Spyke 22:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Lashley's the only guy on the poster. Koberulz 10:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Now BlueShrek has decided to remove mentions all together. I can't revert though since I don't want to violate 3RR. He also refuses to discuss anything here or at WP:PW, and now Rob is siding with him (although I think Rob is just doing it because he seems to disagree with me on everything and is making a bad edit at the TNA Victory Road page). TJ Spyke 21:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how they are not seeing Cor Von's face on the left, but anyway. You're right, Rob does seem to disagree with you a lot. In any case, give me a link, I'll back you up, Spyke. Gavyn Sykes 21:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

He agrees with me because I am right.BlueShrek 21:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No, that is your OPINION (right/wrong can not be applied to opinions). This doesn't have anything to do with you, Rob and I don't get along and I think he is siding with you just for that reason (so he would do the same even if it was someone else instead of you). The posters are notable and who is on them should be noted. TJ Spyke 22:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Youre just mad because you were wrong dude. You need to chill out.BlueShrek 22:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was not wrong. It is your OPINION that the posters shouldn't be included (just as it's my opinion they are, and opinions are not right or wrong). I am not mad, I am just becoming frustrated because the posters are notable but I can't put them back in yet since that would be violating 3RR. Why do you keep removing them anyways? Is it because I showed you proof that Lashley is on the poster? Because you didn't seem to mind the posters being mentioned before that. TJ Spyke 22:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

If this issue is still not resolved, please discuss it further instead of editing. No one has made a case in this thread why mention of the poster should be removed. Since this is in dispute, please discuss why and reach a consensus before editing the article further. I'll note that if the images of the posters are going to be used and claimed as fair use under wikipedia's non-free image use policy, then mentioning the posters in the article helps bolster the fair use claim (using the posters just for decorative purposes is not acceptable on wikipedia). As for who is on the poster, I'm going to say that the listing of Lashley on the WWE store is enough to verify that he is on the poster. But claims that someone else is on the poster needs to be supported by a source to avoid original research. I cannot verify that someone else is on the poster, and since there is multiple concerns over this, we need a citation to meet wikipedia's verification/citing sources policy. In summary, please discuss changes and reach a consensus on these controversial matters before editing further. Thanks.-Andrew c [talk] 17:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Why do we need seperate articles for each year
It just doesn't seem relevant Mark handscombe 18:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

We are having them because a user known as Davnel03 can write a good article for all of them. I'd rather have a bunch of good articles than one, wouldn't you? Peace, The Hyb rid  20:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The only problem multiple articles create is that it means even more articles to watch (my watchlist is already 350+ articles long). TJ Spyke 02:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * My watchlist is 827 pages. I don't think that's really an issue. If you don't use them already, popups really help things move along quickly. Peace, The Hyb rid  02:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, really pages are only I guess really busy at that time of the year, for instance ONS would get loads of edits in May and June, but hardly none in December (apart from the blatant vandal that appears once or twice). Am I wrong? Davnel03 15:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Correct. They still get edits, but the majority of the edits are around the time of the PPV (especially vandalism, which usually dies down the day after the PPV). It may be part of the reason that WCW and ECW PPV articles rarely get edits. TJ Spyke 21:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I personally support the separation of the articles giving that the 2005 and 2006 events were under the ECW banner while the 2007 show was produced under the WWE banner. --Raderick 20:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

One Night Stand Possible Venues 2009
Calgary and Edmonton are possible venues for 2009`s show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.174.121 (talk) 18:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Everywhere's a possible venue really. We need a reliable source before any infomation gets added into the article however. ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 20:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

official venue and date: June 7th- New Orleans Arena, New Orleans LA souce: rajah.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.21.73 (talk) 17:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Find a reliable source, a rumor site isn't reliable. You need something like WWE itself, the arena hosting it (since they sometimes announced ticket info before WWE announces the location), or something like Ticketmaster.  TJ   Spyke   17:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)