User talk:WikiFew/Archive 1

Tag titles
Although we don't add the title change until it airs in the US, when it does we list when the title change happened. SmackDown! was taped on April 17th so that is when the title change happened. Therefore Deuce 'N Domino have been Tag Team champions for 4 days now. -- bullet proof  3:16 20:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Again! SmackDown was taped on April 17th. The show is never aired live! Therefore the title change had already happened before the show aired in the U.S. Please see WP:PW-- bullet proof  3:16 00:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry man, but that’s just the way Wikipedia policy is. If you still disagree with it then I invite you to discuss this with other members of our WikiProject at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling-- bullet proof  3:16 01:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Finishing move
Please stop your vandalism of Melina's finishing move area, her new finisher is a DDT, and not a bulldog. Please stop changing it, it is disruptive, thanks. Fr3nZi3 07:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Latin American Exchange
How? the Trivia section in this page is pretty much useless, tell me do you really believe somebody can integrate the part about the additional "X" on the Dodgers cap or the part about their entrance theme without it being considered Fancruft. -63.245.39.122 04:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Handling trivia is an Essay not an Guideline, nobody can accuse me of vandalism if I chose not to follow it. -63.245.39.122 04:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

TNA TP
I was going by Dave Meltzers coverage of the event. Quote from it: "Love pinned Lavaugh after a running kick.".  TJ   Spyke   02:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Re; 300
Are you sure of the grammar fix here. or was it more of a readability fix? - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  02:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will wait to hear from you regarding your research. :) - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  23:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Nick Nemeth
I have never claimed to own any article on wikipedia, and please don't throw out random accusations like that. The edit history of Nick Nemeth shows my name a lot, as I have done a lot of work on that article, to add content and references, remove unsourced information and revert vandalism. I am sorry that you appear to have a problem with this, but I do not feel that I have reverted every edit that I disagree with. As to the point of your comment, just because cagematch is used in several articles does not mean that it is reliable. It is not listed as reliable at WP:PW/SG - my general rule of thumb is that if it doesn't have acceptance among the project as being reliable, then it should not be used. If you disagree, naturally bring it up at WT:PW. If you detail why you feel it meets WP:RS and should be used in articles, you may gain consensus to add it to the SG. If this happens, I will not challenge its inclusion as a source in any article, never mind Nemeth. Until then, it has not been proven reliable, and therefore is dubious. I should also point out that BLPs are (or should be) held to higher standards, and all sources should be reliable. Of course, wikipedia is a work in progress, and some articles will use unreliable sources, but I do not consider that a valid reason to introduce a dubious reference into an article and I would hope that you do not either. Again, if you gain consensus that cagematch is reliable, it can be used in whatever article you like, but until then, it is best to stick with proven, reliable sources, as I'm sure you can appreciate. Thanks, ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 03:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The only questionable sources in Nick Nemeth's article are Online World of Wrestling (which is allowed for non-controversial information, like match results - which is what it is used for) and the Wrestling Information Archive (which is used only because the source is a copy of the PWI list). I attempt to add reliable sources where I can, but sometimes you have to use the ones that we are advised to "use with caution". In fairness, dubious sources already being in the articles does not mean that we add more dubious sources, but in fact, that we attempt to repalace the dubious ones already in the article, while insisting upon only reliable sources being added. Yes, I can appreciate that wrestling nomenclature can be subjective, but this is why we have sources. We go by the what the sources say, in a (futile it seems like) attempt to avoid disputes. I think for that reason I am loath to accpet anything less than a reliable source for the Zig Zag. By all means, if you can provide a reliable source for the Zig Zag being the reverse legsweep, then obviously add it in.
 * Thank you. I certainly hope that this disagreement wll not deter you from continuing to edit and contribute. The majority of wrestling articles are in bad shape, and could always benefit from continuing editing. Thanks, ♥ Nici ♥ Vampire ♥ Heart ♥ 12:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Brian Todd
Hello WikiFew. I am just letting you know that I deleted Brian Todd, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 11:05, 26 February 2010 (UTC)