Talk:List of WWE personnel/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 → Archive 10

Shad Gaspard and neighboorhoodie debuting tonight

hey people who are in charge of this page shad and neighboorhooddie are debtuing tonight on raw with possibly victoria crawford as their manager

If that is true, then it will be added when it happens Sevenzeroone 02:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Raw Tag Team Addition

Hey add Cryme Time as a tag team on the Raw section

They've been there for a while already, what are you talking about? --James Duggan 03:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

No they havent I read this online yesturday and they were barely put on today!! And I didn't mean to put them in the inactive talent I meant to put them under Tag Teams!

Dubhagan is right, they have been there a while. Since the first Cryme Tyme promo aired, it was posted I believe. RobJ1981 22:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

this roster needs to be locked

excuse me but this roster needs to be locked because people keep messing with the roster and i found vandalism but i reverted it and fixed it

This page was semi-locked before I believe, and then removed. I have no idea why the lock was removed though. RobJ1981 16:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I think the lock should return. New users and anonymous users think Sabu+RVD is a team: they aren't. One team up is not a regular team. Same goes for any random team pairing WWE has, the anons add them (Lashley+Batista is the most recent example of that). RobJ1981 19:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Cryme Time

They were on Sunday Night Heat last night, so haven't they debuted?Freebird Jackson 20:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

It was a dark match. Obviously WWE wouldn't debut a team that is hyped on Raw...on their internet Heat show first. Remember: this page is for changes to the WWE roster page, not about general chat about the roster itself. RobJ1981 21:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. I just saw the Sunday Night HeAt set and assumed that it was HeAt. I'll check my facts better next time.Freebird Jackson 21:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Development Talent Exchange and Diva Debuts Updates

hey y'all need to update the roster and development because OVW and DSW are making superstar trades and The Untouchables plus Cherry are now in DSW and Shawntelle Taylor is now on the ECW roster but not fully yet but she is now working house shows and Maryse Ouellet is now a OFFICIAL WWE Diva because she is now on Smackdown and when she cut a promo yesterday it says on the bottom of her name when they showed what was her name it said on the bottom WWEDivas.com meaning that she is NOW a Diva

Make a italic note next to the name of the current champion

for ex.

John Cena - WWE Champion

that would be very informative

No, this has been discussed. There is already pages that list the current champions, this is a roster page only. RobJ1981 22:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

but it would better if when u look at this psge u will know who the current champion is! redsnake12 22:38, 7 October 2006

This has been discussed here and at WP:PW a million times. The WWE page already lists the champs. All this page deals with is who is on which roster and what their role is. Being champ is not considered a role. James Duggan 23:37, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

being a champion does mean that its a "role" its part of their character

It's been discussed and rejected before, end of discussion. — Moe 23:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
The RAW, SmackDown!, and WWE ECW pages each have their current champions listed, not to mention the main World Wrestling Entertainment page has all the champs. There is no need to list them here as well. TJ Spyke 03:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. If you want to see the champs go to their brand, WWE page or their page. Belevsquad 23:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Boogeyman

As reported he has signed to WWE, but I don't Believe he will be on the main roster for a while. The report on WWE.com said that hes at Booker T's Training Camp.

Old news. But the problem is people thinking he will return to Smackdown for sure, because that's the brand he used to be on. Same goes for people like Psychosis and Joey Mercury. It's not set in stone they are going to return to that brand, yet they are listed under inactive for Smackdown. RobJ1981 18:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Recent edit war over Gene Snitsky and Ken Kennedy

Ken Kennedy has been referred as both Ken Kennedy and Mr. Kennedy, why not list both? Same goes for the whole war over Gene Snitsky/Snitsky. A compromise of some sort needs to be made. This edit/revert war needs to stop, it doesn't solve anything. RobJ1981 22:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it needs to end and there is a compromise... to include both Mr. and Ken, which we tried and ultimately failed. To further compromise, Ken was put in parentheses, but unfortunately some people strongly disagree with this choice despite WWE.com making continual references to him as such. Same for Snitsky. I don't see what other compromise there is. My goal is for this page to be as accurate as possible, naming all of the wrestlers' full ring names. Why, someone insists on "fixing" them is beyond my comprehension and if there must be an edit war, then so be it. Maybe some people think they own the place, but ultimately Wikipedia's goal is to be complete and accurate, which is why it is Gene Snitsky and Mr. (Ken) Kennedy. If they disagree with this, why aren't they changing Bobby Lashley to simply Lashley? DaHumorist 18:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
To me, it seems like TJ Spyke is changing it just to spite me, while I an changing it for the sake of accuracy. DaHumorist 18:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Look, both of you, this revert warring is going to end now. There is obviously a dispute as to which name to use. For the sake of simplicity and less confusion, no more reverting for right now. If you are really trying to keep this encyclopedia accurate, you should come to a consensus before going into an article an commiting WP:3RR. I am coming up with a solution to the problem, but give me a few minutes to write it up. Thanks! — Moe 23:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
What's wrong with my solution? I think both names should be listed, since the wrestlers are known under both names. A solution, is not completely just up to you.RobJ1981 23:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Isn't what I said using both names? Gene Snitsky is both Gene and Snitsky. Mr. Ken Kennedy is both. That IS a compromise! Is it not? DaHumorist 19:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
To Rob: Hence I added the word consensus. Don't jump all over users who are trying to help for christ sake. — Moe 23:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, the dispute involving Ken Kennedy and Gene Snitsky is to whether to include the names like:

Ken Kennedy:

Gene Snitsky:

Concerning these different formats, I'm taking this into consideration:

For Snitsky

  • The name Gene is short for Eugene.
  • The title of his article is Gene Snitsky
  • The name given on wwe.com is "Gene Snitsky"
  • Given it's semi-often usage, the name "Gene" is still part of his gimmick and has not been abandoned.
  • The use of the name "Snitsky" (in WWE) is used to simplify his name while commentating and announcing. (Which by the way, the name "Snitsky" is used to introduce him most of the time)

For Kennedy

  • In English grammer, the "Mr." part of his name is often used in real-life as a social title and the first name is most often excluded.
  • The name "Ken" is used by commentators and (unfrequently) announcers and thus the name "Ken" has not been abandoned in the gimmick.
  • His (Ken Kennedy's) gimmick includes him prefering the announcers to use the name "Mr. Kennedy" and is "prefered" to be called that.
  • The name "Ken" is still used frequently enough to be counted towards his gimmick.

Given this I have come up with a more logic and more well-explained solution and I am willing to make changes despite what RobJ1981 says. Now, given the circumstances, I have chosen which two we should use (but still requires consensus for):

The given reasons are this:

  • Snitsky: Given the the circumstances, his real-life name is Eugene Snitsky. "Gene" is short for "Eugene", and it doesn't require any furthur explanation as to what his name is. Gene Snitsky is also the name of the article. Snitsky is commenly used to shorten his name for consistancy purposes only and "Gene" is still part of the gimmick. His real-life name is Gene Snitsky. So we don't need to add the extra parentheses to furthur disambiguate it. The other option would be to list it as Gene Snitsky (Eugene Snitsky), but that completely defeats the purpose of the page to provide accurate and non-redundant information.
  • Kennedy: Given the unique situation, "Mr." and "Ken" are both used in the gimmick, no doubt about it. The name "Ken" is still implied when he uses the name "Mr. Kennedy". "Mr." is a social title often to give respect to an older peer, the first name is never dropped because he goes by a proper title. Given the name "Ken" is still used among the commentators, it's still, very much, part of his gimmick and needs to be addressed and the current format we use is fine and doesn't need to be changed, thus I chose it above.

I have made these changes to the current format of the article so you can see what it looks like, although it's not that much different looking. I am willing to change this as we form more of a consensus. If you have any questions concerning this, please address them here, not on my talk page please. — Moe 00:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Moe. I was tired of arguing. DaHumorist 01:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the real spelling of Snitsky's surname, from what I understand, is Snisky, no "t". Otherwise, well said. And you can apply the Snitsky arguement to Lashley as well. James Duggan 05:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Nice catch, I didn't see that (maybe because of the really close spelling or the constant revert warring changed it). Knowing that, I agree the current formatting: Gene Snitsky (Eugene Snisky) is best. Snisky is entirly different from Snitsky and the only reason I didn't want the parentheses before was because I thought it was rather redundant to add a wrestler's name in parentheses just because of an alternate nickname (Gene or Eugene), but because the last name is different, I support it. Thanks for pointing out that mistake. — Moe 19:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
What about Triple H? They still call him "Hunter" sometimes. What about King Booker? They sometimes call him Booker T, and his boots say Booker T (plus his tights last week had a "T")? The point is, just because they sometimes use part of their old ring name doesn't mean it's part of their current ring name. TJ Spyke 22:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Hunter is part of HHH (Triple H). Sure, Hunter Hearst Hemsely is still his gimmick, but they haven't called him by his full ring name since 1998 or so, so I think that whole bloodblod snob gimmick is over. Plus, it's just redundant to list it as Triple H (Hunter) or something like that. King Booker is different though. It was just recent since he changed his gimmick to King Booker. Yes, it still says Booker T on his boots and his tights, but thats pretty irrelvant (actually the last time I saw him, Booker had a King's crown on his tights, not the letter T). The only time he was called Booker T recently was in a promo on TV I saw advertising a ppv, but I'm sure that was a mistake, since it showed him in his past gimmick, not his current. His current gimmick about 99% of the time refered to specifically as "King Booker". Until he drops the phony accent and the robe, thats still his gimmick and his name to be refered to on here. Anyways, that has nothing to do with Snitsky or Kennedy. No more revert warring TJ. If you want to change it so bad, conduct a straw poll to determine the change for it to be official, but revert warring won't get you anywhere. — Moe 21:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Fine, I know that it's Snitsky and Mr. Kennedy (not Gene Snitsky and Ken Kennedy), but the WWE and TNA roster pages are already jokes and trying to correct it isn't worth my time. TJ Spyke 03:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
How can you ignore the fact, they do call him Ken on Smackdown (not just once either..). Same goes for Snitsky, they have said Gene several times. This edit change isn't just about what the WWE website says. RobJ1981 04:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
For the same reason they still call Triple H "Hunter" sometimes, or how they sometimes call Hardcore Holly "Bob". It's Mr. Kennedy, and Snitsky. TJ Spyke 05:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Enough. This is what consensus is about. If you want to contest it, make a straw poll, and we will settle it that way, but furthur commenting on it without trying to build a consensus is going against WP:DISRUPT. So please, cut it out. — Moe 18:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Great Idea

This wiki is a great idea as it lists all in one page all the WWE related people! - keep up the good work fellow wikipedians! --Mikecraig 00:22, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

{{Editprotected}}

You have to say what edits you want to make to use editprotected; if you want an unprotection see WP:RFPP. --ais523 15:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Kenny

Yeah sorry about that, I guess I should have waited for RAW to endbefore editting instead of edditting on the fly, sorry about that guys.

Marty Wright

I moved him back to unasigned talent until tonite smackdown This is a big issue that seems to attract a lot of vandalism to upcoming wrestling event articles. The problem being that random people deliberately add matches to the upcoming event's card that have supposedly been announced on commercials aired during RAW, Smackdown!, or ECW. Once these people are confronted about their additions of these spoilers, they tend to use the commercials as their source. The problem is that they do not seem to realize that these promos shown when a WWE broadcast goes off the air during commercials are actually only airing on specific local areas and are NOT in fact being shown nation wide. WWE (at times) unintentionally releases commercials and promos on future events, spoiling matches and sometimes even their outcomes, to the specific local media outlet. This is stupidly done to attract interest from fans in that local area and increase possible attendance and buyrate figures for the upcoming event. The most recent case being the Vengeance DX promo notable for being released in some areas roughly two months before the actual event took place. Only when matches are announced on-screen by talent or during the actual WWE broadcast and NOT during commercials can this sort of information NOT be considered a spoiler. Some may argue, "So what if they aren't shown nation wide, they were still released by World Wrestling Entertainment which means they are legit and therefore all matches spoiled have a right to be added to articles!" Now the problem with that simply is this... It is unencyclopedic. You see, what these people fail to realize is that Wikipedia is NOT, I repeat, NOT a Wrestling News site. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and therefore cannot provide spoilers on future history or events that have yet to be. Wikipedia is an internet encyclopedia, in other words, it's an ENCYCLOPEDIA. If you honestly feel the need to be an Internet Troll and add content spoiling what has yet to occur (in this case about wrestling), then please do so elsewhere such as... oh wow! ...a Wrestling News site! As best stated on Wikipedia Policy... "Before adding any sort of content, ask yourself what would a reader expect to find in an encyclopedia." ...and I highly doubt that you would be expecting to find out who will be in the main event at WrestleMania 100, even if you do happen to find a promo somewhere right now announcing it to be Hulk Hogan vs. Vince McMahon's grandson. Content such as spoilers, rumors, and other nonsense will be removed on the spot for the reasons just explained. This content simply does not comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines and the addition of it is considered vandalism. Once again, please do NOT add any sort of content that even you would know is a spoiler (spoiling future history and events that have yet to be} and unencyclopedic. If you do in fact feel the need to be an Internet Troll, please do so elsewhere and not on Wikipedia. Thank you for reading and I honestly do hope that this clears up any confusion over spoilers and why they are being removed. Thank you. Overlordneo 19:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

colt cabana

colt cabana appears as a jobber on heat, should we add him on the raw roster?

No semper fi — Moe 23:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Terry Funk

Should Terry Funk be taken off the roster? His profile says that he left WWE anyways.

He should've been off it a while ago, but people insist he is part of the roster still. This is due to the fact, WWE.com still lists him. I think it's just a tribute to him, and nothing else. I'm sure he could return someday, but as of now... chances are slim to none. Anytime he is removed, he gets re-added, so it's pointless to remove him because it will just get reverted back. RobJ1981 19:58, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
What if we move him to the Other section like Foley and Austin. Also, maybe Hogan should appear there? DaHumorist 17:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Heyman's personal enforcers

We have them as a team, but since they don't wrestle (on TV anyway) are they really a team? I thought that status only applied to people that actually wrestle. --James Duggan 03:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

TERKAY AND BURKE Since when have they move to the ECW roster

ECW new, valet, Bischoff

Hey should Sylvester Terkay and Elijah Burke be moved to ECW? i know theyre set to, and i think they cut a promo on ECW a week or two ago saying they officially on the roster

Should The Great Khali be on ON Air Talent because right now, he has just been a bodyguard for Daivari and hasnt wrestled yet.

Angel Williams has been called up to valet the Gymini. she did so for a dark match, should she be called up to SD! yet? also where are the gymini on this page? whichever one was injured is now healthy and they should at least be on the SD! roster

Lastly, shouldnt Eric Bischoff be on On Air Talent for RAW? the Cyber Sunday thing seemed like a one time deal to promote the book, but it could develop into a storyline after he screwed DX.

im new so i cant change it myself -Chris

It's been discussed, if something hasn't aired on television yet it doesn't go on the page. Burke and Terkay cut a promo at an ECW taping, and the show hasn't aired yet. This page doesn't list spoilers of future events. As for Angel Williams, it was a dark match...nothing on television, it's not very notable. Seeing as how Gymini aren't active on Smackdown at the moment, they should remain off as well. RobJ1981 18:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Terkay and Burke will be on this week's ECW, but I haven't heard about any promo they've had. Unless a promo can be confirmed, they should stay until ECW airs this week.
Good point about Khali. He was probably put as an active wrestler because he wrestled on SD.
Angel hasn't appeared on TV with them yet, so it doesn't count. Wrestlers get called up for dark matches and house shows all the time without staying on those rosters.
And I'd support moving Eric Bischoff to RAW Other on air because of his appearances over the last few weeks. --James Duggan 18:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Is Lashley on ECW? I heard Styles refer to him as "ECW's newest Extremist" several times on Tuesday night, but on WWE.com he's not on the Extremists list.I'm confused.Freebird Jackson 03:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Table format

I am going to test a table format on this article soon and I would like to know what other peoples opinions on it. semper fi — Moe 21:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually I might hold off on the testing until I get all the kinks worked out. semper fi — Moe 22:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Reason for tweaked format

I just thought that it might be easier to take in rather than looking it straight down. If you guys don't like the new format then go right ahead and change it, I was just making a suggestion. And if anyone adds to any of the 2-column ones, just add one more wrestler to the 2nd column from the 1st. User talk:GunFactor007 23:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and I think it would save a lot of trouble than to create a table too. I dunno less work I guess. User talk:GunFactor007 23:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Recently released section?

Maybe you should put under the Rosters, the Superstars that recently got released from WWE. It could start with the superstars that got released these past few months(maybe start from Kurt Angle to Psicosis.) Every time someone gets released, the oldest link to the superstars gets deleted from the section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.60.73 (talk • contribs)

Not needed. We don't have a section for "recently hired", so there is simply no need for a recently released section. The roster page is for the active roster, not for when people are released. RobJ1981 19:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Bobby Lashley

somebody put Bobby Lashley as a ECW Extremist, but he is not, he just in the ECW Extreme Elimination chamber match for the ECW title, but he is STILL a Friday Night Smackdown Superstar. -RIPped

As per [1], sometimes it takes 24hrs for WWE.com to make other ammendments to rosters..etc. --Mikecraig 03:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

that isn't true...on ECW last Tuesday, they made several comments regarding Lashley being part of ECW now. Which he is. kop

they do tend to ammend things on the website. theyre saying that he "crashed" ecw and they still have him as a smackdown superstar. so he should go back on the smackdown list until he is officially on ecw. L2K 18:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter...he is probably going to be part of ECW anyway...Joey Styles mentioned several times that Lashley was going to be part of the ECW roster now, so what would be the point of switching him back to Smackdown, when he is obviously done with it? --Ch-ri-s 11:06 17 November 2006

Lashley had problems with the SD! booker, so tonights match with Batista vs. Bookah and Finlay is his last SD! match

on ECW.com lashley is listed as part of the roster and has been taken off the smackdown roster page

New roster addition

According to WWE.com, Monty Brown has signed a contract.

edit

Ariel is no longer a tarot card reader, seeing that she hasn't ever really done it on tv...she appears to be be focusing on being a manager or valet for Kevin Thorn. Maybe it should be changed. Also...who said Elijah Burke was strictly a color commontator? Burke and Terkay will probably be wrestling as soon as ECW gets more time.

Actually Ariel is a tarot card reader; she has a column every week about tarot cards; so she is STILL a tarot card reader JustMaria 00:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Heat

Can we put Conway, Venis and Snitsky in a Heat subsection below the Raw females section? 66.27.231.81 21:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

No, wrestlers who only wrestle on seperate programs like Heat are not seperated. The wrestle for the Raw brand, even though they don't appear full-time. semper fi — Moe 21:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Smackdown Tag Teams?

OK Brothers of Destruction and Mr. Kennedy and MVP are not official Tag Teams why post them as teams when it's just two different fueds.

Vandalism DA3

Somebody has put DA3 at the bottom of the Smackdown list. Since it has been open again, I've noticed a lot of vandalism. Can it be locked temporarily? Write your opinion below. 86.20.53.195 19:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this page needs to be locked PERMANT..not TEMPORARY... JustMaria 02:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Protecting it permantently is against Wikipedia policy, so don't even suggest it. semper fi — Moe 03:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Somebody got rid of the links for the RAW Superstars on the page; cleaned it up. I agree, it should be locked for a while. Fhb3 16:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)fhb3

Legends contracts

I am going to seperate wrestlers who have signed a Legends contract with those who have actually signed a contract to make appearances. People who are contracted to just a Legends contract shouldn't be listed here as all they really are, is contracted to use thier likeness for video games and action figures and aren't really contracted to do much else. This will help shorten the page a little. semper fi — Moe 02:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Hardy Boyz

should we list the hardy boys as a stable on both rosters

No because theyre not a regular team- they only were together for ECW and they are only teaming for Survivor Series...however if they were to each move to the same brand and team regularly than they would be

Lock it!

the list should be locked again- its not set in stone that Rey Mysterio will return to SmackDown! when he comes back- i mean WWE added the stipulation that loser leaves brand. if he was definitely going to go back to SD! they wouldve playted it off as an injury angle

and i dont agree with david taylor being moved to unassigned talent- i read 3 different websites for backstage news every day and have heard nothing about Regal and Taylor moving to ECW

Chris

Rey Mysterio

Why does someone keep putting him back under SmackDown? He lost a loser leaves SD match, his last match, and is no longer on that brand. Since he has yet to be assigned a new brand, he should be under Unassigned. --James Duggan 23:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

but the announcer guy never announced it at the beggining of the match and they did'nt advertise it on WWE.com i think they forgot about leave's smackdown bit. Anyways he is still on the roster on WWE.com.
We all know that WWE.com isn't the quickest in updating it's roster info. His bio on here doesn't even say what brand he's with. --James Duggan 02:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Rey should bve on the smackdown roster- he's on it at wwe.com and just recently they edited the SD! roster, taking off the gymini josh matthews and steve romero

Hardy Boyz on ECW

on the Hardy Boyz page (Hardy Boyz) it says that there both on ECW.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.108.233.167 (talk • contribs)

From what I know, they aren't regular roster members of ECW. Matt is still with Smackdown, Jeff is still with Raw. Hardys will be wrestling on Raw tonight (announced on WWE.com), as well as ECW's PPV in December. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, it doesn't mean the information is accurate and correct. I think they should remain in their regular brands, until it's officially said they went to ECW or if it was just a temporary thing. RobJ1981 20:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Btw Someone keeps putting Matt Hardy under RAW Roster he is still Smackdown! Amazing AZ 22:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Joey Mercury?

Anyone know what roster he is going to be on? Amazing AZ 22:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Considering he's still active in OVW, I'd leave him there until we know which brand he's redebuting with. --James Duggan 23:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Joey said that his reunion with Johnny would be for one night only so one could only assume that he would be on Smackdown. Crazy4metallica

And do you have proof he will be on SmackDown? We Shouldn't make assumptions without any sources. semper fi — Moe 01:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Spirit Squad

Ok, it appears that all members of the Spirit Squad have been listed under OVW inactive. This doesn't seem right considering that it's only been one day since the incident on RAW occured. Until something, other than anon editors, can tell us that the Spirit Squad has left the RAW brand, I have readded them. Can someone confirm what happened to the Spirit Squad? semper fi — Moe 03:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

They got thrown in a box by DX with OVW labeled on it, and i think it's just Kenny staying in WWE and maybe Johnny. Amazing AZ 13:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you get some external links to support this please? semper fi — Moe 22:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
They're still on the house show circuit, so they haven't been demoted yet. --James Duggan 23:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

"Out for 8 weeks"

Could someone take the "out for 8 weeks" for Piper's line? You never know, but I just don't think that's necessary to put on there. 69.209.113.141 07:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Chris Jericho

Chris Jericho has recently re-signed to re-debut at the royal rumble this year, could someone check this? [Gravediggerfuneral]

Couldn't find anything about it, not adding it until you provide some kind of source. semper fi — Moe 19:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Brooke Adams

hey y'all need to put Brooke Adams on the offcial roster in DSW because she has signed a development deal —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.248.35.62 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Paul Heyman

i dont know if hes on here (i didnt look too closely) but paul heyman either needs to be put on the ecw inactive list or unassigned talent. although he won't be used on ecw anymore, he is still under contract and hasnt been formally released. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.234.174.191 (talk) 01:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

Readded to the Others section of Others, thanks for catching that :) semper fi — Moe 05:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Undertaker and Kane

For the 10000 time: not a regular team. Stop adding them. I've had to remove it once again today. It's obvious they are teaming next week, because of singles feuds with MVP and Mr. Kennedy (also not a team). Both teams don't belong in the Smackdown teams, until they team on a regular basis. I've added a warning note (visible when editing only) to not add Undertaker and Kane. I'm hoping that helps somewhat at least. RobJ1981 23:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The Hardys & MNM

Ive noticed that The Hardys & MNM have been listed under Raw's Tag Team section and have a caption that says 'An official roster hasnt been set for them'. If thats true, why would they be listed on Raw?  Belevsquad  (talk)  06:40, 11 December 2006

They were only one time reunions, I don't think either of the teams are still together. Either way, they shouldn't even be on the page because of the temporary nature of their reunions. --James Duggan 21:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

worlds greatest tag team.

they have only had one match together. isnt it a bit early to be saying that the stable is back together for good? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cradle666 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Considering Shelton made the announcement that they were back, I would say they are back full time. --James Duggan 19:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yea just seen it now on WWE.com.... anyway to remove the suggestion???

What suggestion? --James Duggan 00:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Ric Flair

Shouldn't Ric Flair be moved back up to the main roster? He was on Raw last night...-Tommy

Well that didn't take long lol-Tommy

Marty Elias

Didn't they say the name of the referee Umaga beat up last night was Marty Elias? Tim Long 23:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about that, but his real name is Marty Rubalcaba. --James Duggan 02:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Knock Out Tap Out

Is Sylvester Terkay and Elijah Burke's stable name really the tap out knock out connection? because i havent heard them be called this

jazz and mack

jazz and rodney mack should be taken off the inactive list and put on the unassigned list. just because theyre wrestling at house shows doesnt mean theyre going to be called up anytime soon. i mean jazz hasn t wrestled at a house show since october and mack since november. eric perez works ECW house shows; if he isnt up there then jazz and mack shouldnt. and if theyre there on the assumption that theyll be called up, then oleg prudius(now vladimir kozlov) shouldve been on raws inactive list when he was working their house shows. Nyycraze13 20:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Jazz is on the official ECW roster at WWE.com, so she stays on that roster. However, I do agree with you on Rodney Mack. And please sign your posts by putting ~~~~ after your entry. Thanks. --James Duggan 01:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Rey Mysterio

I put rey mysterio on the smackdown roster under inactive. I know this was discussed before, but he is still on smackdown's roster page and when i looked at the smackdown results for the show he lost to chavo on, it made no mention of him being forced off smackdown. if he really should go under unassigned then i understand Nyycraze13 20:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. An "I Quit" match doesn't mean you quit the show, it means you quit the match. DaHumorist 16:19, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the stipulation of the match was that the loser not only quits the match, but quits SD as well, though the WWE does have about seven more months to figure out what to do with Rey, so he could end up back on SD. They've ignored their own stipulations before. --James Duggan 22:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah i remember it being a loser quits smackdown match, but i dont remember them referring to it as that on the show or after so idk. Nyycraze13 00:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Quick notice for the ECW section

I just wanted to say that i think the Female Wrestlers area should be kept as they do wrestle (a couple of weeks back it was Ariel VS Kelly Kelly). Also whats up with Knock Out Tap Out Connection? I have never heard WWE, WWE.com or wrestling info sites refer to them as this. One more, I'd say that Doug and Derek should be just kept as Personal Enforcers as they aren't Heyman's anymore.  Belevsquad  (talk)  11:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

They were called Knock Out Tap Out Connection last time they appeared on ECW about 3 weeks ago or so. I am confirming this, even though I was not the person who initially had posted it here on the roster. That means 2 people have noted this. As far as the enforcers, Personal Enforcers doesn't make any sense. They should either be Heyman's Personal Enforcers or maybe simply just The Enforcers. DaHumorist(talk) 12:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
They are called "Paul Heyman's Personal Enforcers", although who knows if they will still be called that with Heyman long gone. I have never heard them say "Knock Out Tap Out Connection" either. TJ Spyke 03:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

X-pac

Does anyone know if x-pac has re-signed to the WWE?? [Gravediggerfuneral]

no he hasn't (Cradle666)

Big Dick Johnson

When (if ever) should we actually create an article about Christopher DeJoseph/Big Dick Johnson? He doesn't appear weekly, but he has appeared many times on TV and even on PPV a few times. TJ Spyke 03:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It's actually been created twice and deleted each time. --James Duggan 03:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I am aware of that actually, when should it be created and not deleted? He has been appearing more frequently over the past few months, and has even been talked about on TNA (through the VKM skits). TJ Spyke 04:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
That I do not know. I actually thought the last article was decent enough to be kept. --James Duggan 04:21, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
It's a bit hard not to mention a guy. It's like saying he doesn't exist and has done nothing every time the article is deleted. Govvy 11:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
What if someone makes the article (good enough to keep) and put a message there saying for it to not be deleted? I think that he should have a page as yes he does make appearances and he is a part of the creative team. --Belevsquad 01:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Rob Conway

Could anyone tell me if it was possible that Rob goes to ECW and reforms La Resistance with Rene Dupree? Because he only quit Raw and then McMahon fired him. I dont think he's been fired from WWE. Also (if) he went to ECW wouldn't it be cool if they brought back the ECW Tag Team Championship? And the tag teams currently in ECW and Dupree & Conway had a match? lol --  Belevsquad  (talk) 

As far as I know, he's only fired from RAW. --James Duggan 01:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ohio Valley Wrestling roster and Deep South Wrestling roster pages

Since the OVW roster was deleted, I have merged the information from the past article back onto the article with a new formatting with contracted and non-contracted wrestlers. It's a little sloppy, so any suggestions on how to improve it would help. Also, since the threat of the smaller roster pages is around, I am merging the DSW roster into this as well, we don't need deleted as well. semper fi — Moe 06:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree with this. This page is intended for the WWE roster, and non-contracted wrestlers don't belong here. I think there should be a discussion on the matter. - DaHumorist 8:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I too am not to fond of including non-contracted talent. This roster is for people under contract to WWE. Just because there is no longer an OVW roster page doesn't mean the non-contracted OVW talent belong here, same with DSW. Anyone non-contracted with a page should be on the indy list, otherwise they are SOL without their own roster page. James Duggan 01:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
In fact, are the wrestlers not contracted to WWE even significant enough for Wikipedia in the first place? They are virtually unknown independant wrestlers who don't even work for top wrestling companies. Of course, this is another argument in and of itself, but it certainly should help in the consideration of keeping the non-contracted wrestlers on this page. DaHumorist talk 04:48, 4 January, 2007 (UTC)

Jazz

A new editor keeps moving her to the Raw roster. Yet, I have seen no evidence she's gonna be on Raw. Is there something I missed, or was I right to revert? --James Duggan 02:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Jazz remains on the ECW roster under inactive. I have checked and she isnt being moved. She is still apart of ECW its just shes taking time off. --Belevsquad 02:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Faces and heels

IMO I think wrestlers should be sorted by faces and heels...just my 2 cents--Jdrouskirsh 09:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_WWE_personnel/Archive_4&oldid=1154158309"