Talk:WrestleMania 33

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Information[edit]

The Main Event will be a World Heavyweight Championship Match between Roman Reigns Vs Seth Rollins Vs Dean Ambrose. The Undertaker will take his final dance against Christian w/edge in his corner. How do we know this already? There is no source for this information. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 12:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously - why is this here. Over a year away and the only information is that it will occur.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it's an unsection match why did they sign a contract then the match is sanctioned Mirrormaster123 (talk) 01:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Huh Abhthki (talk) 17:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Where did it come from? 98.19.214.13 (talk) 14:37, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I went to the Minnesota Vikings official website and found a way better high quality picture, how and can I post it on the article page? 98.19.214.13 (talk) 02:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it came from the Vikings page, no. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the Orlando Citrus Bowl website, sorry. 98.19.214.13 (talk) 03:31, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If the pic is for WrestleMania XXIV, so no. I could not find a pic for it on its cite: Orlando Citrus Bowl website - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 03:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, the pic I saw was in the events category and it was for WrestleMania 33 in 2017. 98.19.211.157 (talk) 20:52, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the events page. [1] 98.19.211.157 (talk) 22:29, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It looks the same as in the article. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 04:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well it looks better quality to me but it's okay, I won't bother you with it anymore. 98.18.59.229 (talk) 21:13, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the picture that I wanted you to see. [2] 98.18.59.229 (talk) 21:24, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit the logo and put the official Wrestlemania poster GloMan 300 (talk) 04:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Barack Obama vs. Big Show[edit]

I have a reliable source that states Big Show will face Barack Obama at WrestleMania 33. Here is the source. [3] 98.18.59.229 (talk) 21:21, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2016[edit]

94.128.251.163 (talk) 17:32, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply] 

Gibbon gun
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. Topher385 (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Rumble winner's choice[edit]

@Str1977: In this article of dream matches for Goldberg (posted on January 7), when you scroll down to Goldberg vs. AJ Styles, it says: "Of course, if Goldberg does win the Royal Rumble Match, there's always another championship route he could pursue: The WWE Championship". Then the next one with John Cena, "Much like the road through the WWE Universal Championship will run through either Owens or Reigns, any challenge to the WWE Championship will likely pass through either AJ Styles or John Cena,..." (in reference to if Goldberg were to choose the WWE Championship). Also, from 2004 to 2013, the winner could choose which title to challenge for (2014 to 2016, there was only the WWE title). --JDC808 ♫ 05:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as said in my edit summary, please don't blanket revert every addition that was made. By what you said in your edit summary, the only thing you should have reverted was the choice between the titles, but you just undid all the edits I made since DaveA2424's edit. --JDC808 ♫ 05:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, I read your source which, I'm afraid is not enough. It talks about Goldberg and dream matches. That's less than an official announcement that every wrestler has the choice. Goldberg is not part of any brand so he could have a choice that branded-exclusive wrestlers don't have. If this is your only source then it appears that the whole choice thing - which hasn't been mentioned in any show leading up to the Rumble - is wrong. Str1977 (talk) 06:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I gave you the source and you refuse to accept it? Goldberg is considered part of Raw. Yes, they are listed as "dream matches", but you're completely ignoring what I quoted. You asked me to provide a source and I gave you one. Now I'll ask you to provide a source that says that they do not have a choice. --JDC808 ♫ 06:23, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's not that I don't accept the source (which was so a propos your claim that you didn't even bother include it in the article) - it just doesn't say what you assert. It talks about dream matches for Goldberg and claims that he could go after the WWE World Championship (previously held by AJ Styles and now by John Cena) after winning the Royal Rumble.
Exactly. That right there says he had a choice. It's not some random assertion by the author. If Goldberg, or any wrestler, didn't have a choice, they wouldn't have mentioned it. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Goldberg has been labelled undrafted (and his WWE.com page speaks in favour of that: notice there's not sign above his name, compare with http://www.wwe.com/superstars/goldust and http://www.wwe.com/superstars/dean-ambrose, who both have their respective brand's sign just above their name) and I suppose that COULD be an explanation for the scenario in the article.
Yet he has never appeared on SmackDown and Mick Foley counted him as part of Raw when predicting who would win the Royal Rumble match. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
However, that was merely my consideration that could save this article's credibility. It is not a very dependable source anyway, since it is basically some author speculating about dream matches. In any case, it cannot serve as a source for anybody but Goldberg.
You like to brush off these WWE.com authors as if they're some random nobody with no credibility. I can't say that they do have credibility, but at the same time, I'm not gonna belittle them. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When has the rule that the winner can challenge for a world title OF HIS CHOICE ever been announced or even talked about? (And citing the examples of the first brand split doesn't count since the rules of then cannot be assumed to be automatically reactivated in the second brand split.) If the winner had a choice it would now be an issue in shows as it was back in the day when Undertaker chose to go after the WHC or Battista chose to challenge HHH. Has it come up in any show? No one on Raw has even hinted at the possibility that KO might have to face Randy Orton at WM? Has anyone mentioned anything about him challenging for a different title at Smackdown? I don't think so. And nowhere has Randy Orton been shown to make such a choice (or any choice at all).
You can't claim that the rules don't carry over. Orton has made a choice. The WWE article (a different one) posted on Monday (sourced in the article) stated that Orton will challenge for the WWE Championship, and then on SmackDown last night, he made that clear. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, I never proposed to insert a "they don't have a choice" line. You inserted a sentence that has zero basis in sources. Hence, it has to be removed. Str1977 (talk) 15:48, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you claim zero basis, yet I provided you a source that you are brushing off. I wasn't implying to add to the article that they couldn't choose, but merely provide a source here (in this discussion) that proves they couldn't choose. All you can go off is speculation because "it wasn't mentioned" other than the Goldberg article. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PS. You said I didn't like the word "choice" and were "compromising". It's not the word I'm objecting to but the inclusion of claims (whether explicitely or in a more hidden way) that have no basis in either source or fact. If you want to include a claim than it's your job to provide a source for that exact claim, not mine to include a source to the opposite.
But if I challenge your claim, then it is your job to provide evidence to support your claim. Otherwise, your claim is merely a lack of them mentioning it on TV. Also, let's just say they didn't have a choice; if a Raw wrestler were to have won, then they would be challenging for the Universal title, so this — "The winner of the Royal Rumble match traditionally earns a world championship match in the main event of WrestleMania. This year, it was for either Raw's WWE Universal Championship or SmackDown's WWE Championship." — is correct, whether it was a choice or not. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PPS. As for blanket reverting, you are pretty much guilty of the same thing, reinserting things like "pinned for a near-fall" and bloating the article again by repeatedly using the full name "SmackDown Live" against our agreement. Str1977 (talk) 16:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't do that. Looking back over the article's revision history, Vjmlhds reverted what you had done, then JayCoop completely removed the section for being unsourced; I reverted JayCoop and provided a source. As to the full name, you stopped editing for awhile and other editors were implementing it. I didn't "correct" them because I don't mind the use of the full name and feel it can be used interchangeably throughout. And that was an agreement between us, not the whole WikiProject Professional wrestling community. --JDC808 ♫ 17:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I had to change it again because the "Orton stated his intent" was backed up by no source at all. The first time Orton adressed the situation was when he adressed John Cena (which is already retold in the next line).
PS. And the article again contained another "SmackDown Live". I do expect you to uphold your part of the agreement. Str1977 (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Tell the "agreement" to others. Anyways, an article on WWE.com (which I'm pretty sure is sourced here) said he was challenging for the WWE title the day after the Rumble. --JDC808 ♫ 23:11, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WWE.com said that because Orton, a SD wrestler, had won the Rumble. Hence, Orton earned a title shot for the WWE World title. But Orton never had SAID anything about this, never "stated any intent" or the like. Str1977 (talk) 08:50, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Big Show VS. Shaq[edit]

Please add Big Show VS. Shaquille O'Neal it is well known that they will face each other at WrstleMania 33. 47.202.17.249 (talk) 14:12, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DONE Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 16:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WWE not confirmed this match is happening. Nothing should be added until the WWE themselves has offically confirmed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.237.180.75 (talk) 23:05, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is clearly notable as it has verifiable reliable sources reporting on it. -- Dane talk 01:30, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dane: Verifiable sources are reporting on the possibility of the match. They have not confirmed it. If those sources confirmed it, then WWE would have also already confirmed it. WWE has not confirmed it yet. They have only teased it. --JDC808 ♫ 05:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JDC808: "The Big Show challenged Shaq to a match at WrestleMania 33 at the ESPYs, which Shaq accepted." - Followed by the social media on Shaq's official accounts as reported by FOX Sports, the match is going ahead. The third party reliable sources says it's a go - so it should be included until a reliable source says otherwise. We do not need official confirmation from WWE (which would be a primary source). -- Dane talk 05:22, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dane: Actually, no, those sources have not said it's a go. At best, they say it "looks" to be happening. That's not a confirmation. That's speculation. Again, if those sources did in fact confirm it, WWE would have also confirmed it. And we actually do need confirmation from WWE because they can change their minds. It's their show after all. --JDC808 ♫ 05:26, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JDC808: By that standard we could change half of the Wikipedia articles because things could go another direction. We use what the sources unrelated to the event say. In the current source, it states very clearly that Shaq accepted the match and that Shaq has said he is coming for Big Show at WrestleMania 33. The title of the article itself is a confirmation: "Shaq is in the gym preparing for his WrestleMania match with The Big Show". -- Dane talk 05:32, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dane: He can accept the match all he wants, but that doesn't mean it's going to happen. Big Show in an interview in November (after the ESPYs where Shaq "accepted") said it could happen, but did not say it would. Real talk, I know the match is going to happen, but we can't say that until there is an actual confirmation. WWE themselves shared that Instagram post of Shaq working out, but guess what they said? They said "will it happen", not "it's going to happen". The only matches confirmed for the card are Goldberg vs Lesnar and Orton's WWE Championship match. --JDC808 ♫ 05:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Took a look at the sources that provided from Sky Sports and Fox Sports and it looks like it's mostly teasing the possibility that the match will happen, none of it definitively confirms the match. But in the end WrestleMania 33 is a WWE event, and like JDC808 said, WWE have only confirmed two matches on the card and none of the matches are Big Show vs. Shaq. WWE most likely announced the match closer to WrestleMania, but for now we should only included the matches that has been confirmed by the WWE. TheDeviantPro (talk) 06:11, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So we are ignoring policy and vaild refrences,Got it. Perfect reason why I'm retiring and is why Wiki is so screwed up. One second it's a vaild reference but the next its not. By the reasons above every wresting article needs to have facelifts and any source NOT WWE needs to be removed. Those refrences are third party reliable sources and say it's a go - so it should be included until a reliable source says otherwise. We do not need official confirmation from WWE (which would be a primary source). This whole thing is a perfect example of we only follow policy when it's convenient. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 09:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No we are not ignoring policy or valid references. The problem with Sky Sports and Fox Sports sources that they don't know if the match is happening and that they teasing the possibility of the match. The first source says the tweets suggests the match will take place on April 2, but other then that, it doesn't really confirms anything. The second source says the match has been tentatively on the card ("tentatively" means not definitely), therefore the match is not yet confirmed. In the end we need sources that actually confirms the match. Tweets and photos of them on Twitter and Instagram, trash talking each other and teasing a match at WrestleMania, doesn't confirm the match is happening. TheDeviantPro (talk) 11:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@WarMachineWildThing: Pinging you in case you didn't see TheDeviantPro's response. What Deviant said is my exact argument on the matter. --JDC808 ♫ 17:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My final post on the matter, You are are ignoring policy and valid references. Fox sports broke the news about Teddy longs induction FIRST not WWE, which validates the point further. The match is happening it's been on to many sites, it's why Shaq is preparing and why Show is getting in better shape. WWE has even posted about, it's called build up to get interest. 2 vaild sources were removed which is against policy and NOTHING has been refrenced stating it wasn't happening. So the removal is Incorrect. But whatever, I'm retired. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 03:55, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Add the goddamn match its been confirmed and all is ready to go we don't need WWE to publicly come out and announce it varies News sources have confimed and they showed big show getting ready!!! What the hell is wrong with you people!!!!

(edit conflict)

@Sc30002001:@WarMachineWildThing: Let me just ask you one final thing, did you actually read the sources? I'm not disputing the reliability of the sources. What I am disputing is the claim that you and Dane believe they have based on their click bait title. Also, it's not against policy to remove sources if those sources don't actually back what's claimed. I will quote these articles:

  1. "WWE powerhouse Big Show has continued to tease a WrestleMania showdown with basketball legend Shaquille O'Neal"
  2. "Show's tweet suggests the bout will take place on April 2 in Orlando"
  1. "but one of the bouts has been tentatively on the card since the ESPYs last summer."

Everything else in the articles are information about the two, their past encounters, Shaq "accepting" the match (which isn't an automatic guarantee), the back and forth tweets, and speculation. No where in those articles does it confirm that the match is happening.

Also, to follow up on Fox Sports breaking the news about Teddy's Hall of Fame induction first, I can use that exact argument against you. Every time that another news outlet other than WWE has reported something first, WWE soon after posted about it and mentioned it on TV. They have done neither in regards to this match. They have only teased the possibility of it. As I said in an earlier post, I know the match is gonna happen. It's why I've added information to the hidden paragraph in the Background section, however, I know that we don't put information unless it's confirmed. --JDC808 ♫ 05:21, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know what both articles say, pretty sure @Dane: has read as well. WWE would NEVER allow all this build up if it weren't true, The removal from the article was and is wrong period. We all know it's coming, vaild sources were provided, you removed them. Just like the UK title/NXT argument you continue to drag out and have with another user, your wrong. Now you just admitted you know the match is happening which is why you hid the storyline in the article. It should be removed as well hidden or not, Typical double standard bs. You then got the admin to unlock the article for you even though you are part of the dispute and involved in this talk so you could edit the article, dirty and underhanded tactics to get your way. So Don't ping me again. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 05:50, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Its been confirmed by many news sources and CBS News!!! the sources and match have been added only to be undone by the likes of you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sc30002001 (talk) 05:36, 14 February 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]
I'm unsure why this match is still unlisted but the Bray Wyatt match is good to go. That seems far more "tentative" then the Shaq match, given that Daniel Bryan said Wyatt may not even be the champion by WrestleMania. Sourcing is better for Shaq/Show too.LM2000 (talk) 06:05, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WarMachineWildThing You've read the sources? Really? Because no where in them does it confirm the match. I'm dumbfounded by how you can claim that they confirm it when they clearly do not. I even quoted both articles that clearly shows that it has not been confirmed. And yes, WWE could build something up that doesn't happen. They've done it before. As to getting the article unlocked, if you noticed, I have not edited anything in regards to this issue. The only thing I've edited since was in regards to the WWE title match. And guess what? Anyone can edit it now, not just me. It's not like I got special privileges for only myself to edit it. Also, that paragraph is hidden until confirmed. Otherwise it's WP:OR to say it's confirmed when it's not (it also makes it easier for when they do confirm it and all we have to do is unhide it). Sorry for pinging you again, but I'm not gonna let you batter me without the chance to follow up. --JDC808 ♫ 07:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sc30002001: I don't see you providing sources that actually confirm the match (and no, I'm not the only one). I only see you using unnecessary language and snide comments. --JDC808 ♫ 07:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@LM2000: If you notice, the WWE Championship match is "Bray Wyatt or John Cena (c) vs. Randy Orton" since Bray will defend the title against Cena on SmackDown tonight. Also, check the sources carefully. None of them confirm the Show/Shaq match, despite what the others try to say. --JDC808 ♫ 07:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Um, that first TMZ source flat out says it's not confirmed. -> "A rep for the WWE tells us ... "While the challenge was made at the ESPYs, this match has not been confirmed." Anyways, it appears that we've come to a compromise on the RfC. Waiting for more comments there first. --JDC808 ♫ 03:21, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why matches are only included in such articles is not that only WWE is a reliable source (though I wouldn't put trash like TMZ in that category without qualification) but that WWE is the match making entity. They decided if a match takes place or not. Unless they schedule the match, it doesn't belong in the list. As soon as they schedule it, I wouldn't mind any other source.
But matches like "Bray Wyatt or John Cena (c) vs. Randy Orton" are unacceptable too. There never was a time when such an entry was justified. Orton won the Rumble, so he was set to face the champion (whoever that might be at WM) and we always should assume that the champion stays the same. When Wyatt won the title, the obvious match was Orton vs. Wyatt, regardless of any scheduled rematches Mr Cena would have. This way, it will turn into a venue for crystalballing and also subject to weekly change as another title match could be scheduled anytime from here to WM. Of course, things have now drastically changed due to Orton putting his title match on the shelf, so now it's Wyatt vs. TBD. (And not, not Wyatt vs. a list of all the Battle Royal participants). Str1977 (talk) 21:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • And some were trying to say it was confirmed. I told them something could happen. Anyways, thanks for the source. --JDC808 ♫ 18:03, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Someone managed to misspell Shaq's last name as "O'Neil" throughout most of the "Background" section. Article is protected, otherwise I'd fix it. Can someone please correct the spelling to "O'Neal"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.89.150 (talk) 20:47, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

TBD vs. Orton[edit]

While the match could very well be Wyatt vs. Orton, there is no source confirming this match. As such, I believe the right course of action is to keep it as TBD vs. Orton. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 04:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wyatt is the WWE Champion. Although Daniel Bryan said he could potentially lose it between now and WM, we don't know if there will even be a championship match before WM. It's kind of WP:CRYSTAL. What we know is Wyatt is champion and will be for the foreseeable future. We can't predict that he'll lose the title between now and WM. This isn't like before Elimination Chamber; then, we actually knew that Cena was defending the title and could potentially lose it. Right now, we don't know when or if a championship match will happen before WM. Also, inside sources have already confirmed it's Wyatt vs Orton, as they confirmed that Wyatt would win the title tonight. --JDC808 ♫ 05:05, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If Orton won't challenge Wyatt then wouldn't it make sense that the only other option is to challenge Owens for the Universal title? Did the COO give a deadline for when Orton has to choose which title he's going for before it can't be switched? This isn't like MITB he can't wait until the last second. 184.145.16.140 (talk) 16:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It may make sense, but it's not happening. Orton is refusing his guaranteed match altogether (in the storyline right now anyways). Reports are saying that he's still actually going to face Wyatt for the title at WrestleMania, but it may turn into a triple threat match also involving Harper. The way I see it happening is that Harper beats AJ Styles tomorrow night and then Orton will insert himself back into the title match. --JDC808 ♫ 16:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Who will Alexa face at Wrestlemania, Natalya or Mickie James[edit]

Wrestlemania Mancityrealmadridmilan (talk) 23:05, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Find out on the next episode of SmackDown Live. --JDC808 ♫ 23:20, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2017[edit]

Changing Wrestlemania 33 poster as there is already one that has been announced and that is offical MattbergReal (talk) 01:22, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not Done Unless there is a free to use non copyright version it can't be used. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 01:25, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AJ Styles vs. Shane McMahon is already confirmed BraxtonH25 (talk) 13:52, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AJ Styles vs. Shane McMahon[edit]

This match was confirmed by WWE a few days ago on talking smack. BraxtonH25 (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No Official announcement Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 17:01, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about the scene where AJ went off on Shane, that didn't confirm the match, nothing was said about a match, although it did add more to the development of the potential match. --JDC808 ♫ 21:22, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Undertaker's Next WrestleMania Opponent[edit]

Do you think Roman Reigns will be The Undertaker's next opponent for WrestleMania 33? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:40C:8202:2C05:E12C:8056:3A3C:ADC0 (talk) 02:58, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrestling Observer says yes, and that appears to be true based on what happened on Raw. --JDC808 ♫ 03:42, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Personally Roman cheated thats why i put Undertaker def. Roman Reigns Trevor Gonsalves (talk) 01:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay? The official result doesn't say that. --JDC808 ♫ 02:24, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Roman v taker[edit]

They announced it on Facebook Vikramrat (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, already added on the page. --JDC808 ♫ 17:50, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2017[edit]

Please add a new entry under Matches "Baron Corbin vs Dean Ambrose (c)" for 'Intercontinental Championship'. Er.aayush (talk) 19:24, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not confirmed, unless you have a source that says otherwise. We only add matches to the table that are confirmed. --JDC808 ♫ 19:28, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2017[edit]

Under Storylines in the please change the sentence "However, at the conclusion of the February 28 episode, as Wyatt was about to deliver his invocation, Orton appeared on the titan-tron and was at The Wyatt Family compound, which was also the burial of Sister Abigail, the cult leader that Wyatt followed and named his finisher after." to "However, at the conclusion of the February 28 episode, as Wyatt was about to deliver his invocation, Orton appeared on the titan-tron and was at The Wyatt Family compound, which was also the burial place of Sister Abigail, the cult leader that Wyatt followed and named his finisher after."

Please add the word place between "burial" and "of" as the compound is not actually the burial itself, rather, the burial place of Sister Abigail. BigDaddyDouglas (talk) 00:40, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DONE Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 01:14, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2017[edit]

Looking in the Raw GM office, the rumored WrestleMania 33 poster looks confirmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiitit (talk • contribs) 03:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 03:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I want the official poster added so it shows that where the WM 33 logo is shown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiitit (talk • contribs) 01:05, 22 March 2017 (UTC) Permission to do it? I can edit it now, and I'd be glad to add the poster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiitit (talk • contribs) 06:37, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fix Info Required[edit]

Some wise ass has changed the venue and city to The SSE Hydro in Glasgow. Can someone please change it back?

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2017[edit]

Btvs231 (talk) 17:38, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let me edit WRESTLEMANIA 33!'n

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. — IVORK Discuss 22:17, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2017[edit]

I saw the hyped up poster for the Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal and I'd like Sin Cara, Titus O'Neil, Aiden English, Simon Gotch, Konnor, Viktor, Mark Henry, and Kalisto added to the "Announced Andre the Giant Memorial Battle Royal participants" chart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiitit (talk • contribs) 01:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Will Finn Balor be at WrestleMania[edit]

Finn Balor returned to action about 3 weeks ago but hasn't been in the ring once. Will he be at WrestleMania. BraxtonH25 (talk) 20:02, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We don't know. All I know is that the reason he hasn't been on TV is because they don't know what to do with him yet story wise (Also, he has been in the ring, just not on TV). --JDC808 ♫ 21:47, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He will be at WrestleMania Finn Bálor vs somae joe 

Abhthki (talk) 02:29, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Official theme confusion[edit]

The Metallica song "Am i Savage?" is similar to how WWE used "The Memory Remains" to promote Taker vs HHH III at WM 28. It still counts as the official theme song. There's no need to remove it. Also, Tinashe's "Flame" is not billed as the official theme.Leviathan648 (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't listened to "Flame", but I think it's the song they are using to promote the Raw Women's Championship match in those ads on YouTube. Hiitit (talk) 03:48, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, the announcers only confirm the song that is being used as the official theme song.Leviathan648 (talk) 21:35, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WWE confirmed on their website two days ago. And yes, Am I Savage? is included in that. [4] Nickag989talk 14:23, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The number of participants in the André the Giant Battle Royal[edit]

It's listed in this article as a 30-man battle royal. 30 men have been confirmed but I checked the citation given as well as several other pages on the WWE website and none of them say the match is limited to 30 men. Maybe there's a source I've missed, but if so it should be cited.

The first one had 31 men so it's not unprecedented that the actual number might not be a multiple of 10. Also Luke Harper, Samoa Joe, Finn Bálor and Kane have no match sanctioned for Wrestlemania. The former two have been built up for the last few months and it seems a bit unlikely that they would do that and have them not do anything at Wrestlemania, Finn has already wrestled so he evidently is fit to compete, Kane I don't know but it's still possible.

I'm not saying it's certain that there will be more than 30 participants, but I think it's a bit misleading to write it as 30 when we can't be certain on the number. BadNameThinkerOfer (talk) 18:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WWE only shows 24 participates, so where are all the others coming from? Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 20:56, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There was a poster that WWE showed on SmackDown that had the others on it. It's sourced. --JDC808 ♫ 21:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see it sourced in the next to the entrants, that uses the source Chris mentioned. Am I missing something?LM2000 (talk) 01:09, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WWE is still it listing 24 and I've still not found anything saying otherwise. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 01:22, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is the source confirming the others, which is linked in the prose. --JDC808 ♫ 05:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wrestling inc. is unreliable per WP:PW/RS. It's probably true but this article is enough of a mess as it is, I'd prefer to get a real source before it's reinstated.LM2000 (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Socks editting it,yeah article is a complete mess. WWE still only lists 24. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 12:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to dig around to see if I can find a reliable source. I do remember seeing that graphic. --JDC808 ♫ 20:12, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Official poster[edit]

Why has the poster not been uploaded? They released it a good month ago now. Rusted AutoParts 20:36, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2017[edit]

The poster for the event has been revealed, is anybody going to add it? 2A02:C7D:2588:7000:61C4:2C19:9D1B:ED4D (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --JDC808 ♫ 22:06, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Smackdown Woman's Championship[edit]

The Smackdown Woman's Championship is no longer being listed on the Pre-Show. It looks like it has been promoted up to the Main Card. Becky Lynch tweeted about it [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.57.8.11 (talk) 01:32, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://twitter.com/BeckyLynchWWE/status/847615871052677120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cagesideseats.com%2Fwwe%2F2017%2F3%2F30%2F15132792%2Fsmackdown-womens-title-match-wrestlemania-33-main-card

You're right, it has been moved up to the main card. L1amw90 (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2017 (UTC) L1amw90 (talk) 14:25, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2017[edit]

189.241.128.86 (talk) 20:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Official theme songs with references. Stephen Marley is not featured in the "Greenlight" song.

Done ActuallyTheFakeJTP(talk • contribs)(April Fools!) 17:23, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I bet you didn't look the table beside. Anyways, "Am I Savage?" is confirmed as an official the song by WWE: http://www.wwe.com/article/get-the-music-of-wrestlemania-33 and Metallica themselves: https://www.facebook.com/Metallica/photos/a.10150204649640264.311112.10212595263/10154295262565264/

This is an additional note for future editions of WM: almost every song used for promos 1 or 2 weeks before the PPV are considered official, take a look at "Sympathy for the Devil" and "Hail to the King" last year, "Legacy" and "In Time" at 30.

DoneIt has been answered, stop flipping it back to unanswered. List is updated, maybe you should create a user name next time, then you can add it yourself. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 23:49, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://pitbullupdates.com/2017/01/29/pitbulls-greenlight-is-the-official-wrestlemania-33-theme-song/
  2. ^ http://www.wwe.com/article/get-the-music-of-wrestlemania-33

Semi-protected edit request on 2 April 2017[edit]

112.204.207.40 (talk) 01:53, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

please change the poster

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. JTP (talk • contribs) 02:00, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please change the poster just like other ppv pages with date and time Jeno4444 (talk) 05:43, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not Done Official poster for event is up. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 06:27, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Search for a poster with date and time then you can see it in google images Jeno4444 (talk) 00:43, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And it should be the size of the other ppv pages (poster with date and time) Jeno4444 (talk) 00:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request 3 April 2017[edit]

Someone managed to misspell Shaq's last name as "O'Neil" throughout most of the "Background" section. Article is protected, otherwise I'd fix it. Can someone please correct the spelling to "O'Neal"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.220.89.150 (talk) 20:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

*Green tickY Fixed it. How did nobody notice that until now? Nickag989talk 20:54, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, we still use "Shaq" anyways. Nickag989talk 21:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most viewed article of the week[edit]

Thanks to all who worked on making this a comprehensive article for our readers!--Milowent • hasspoken 12:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should the WrestleMania 33 poster main image be made shorter?[edit]

In comparison to the poster images for previous WrestleMania articles, I think this should be taken into consideration.Mogomaniac (talk) 03:02, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. The 2:1 aspect ratio is not a huge deal, if we had a poster. Nickag989talk 19:55, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Venue name issue[edit]

While WM33 was hosted at Camping World Stadium, the commentators kept on referring to the venue as the "Orlando Citrus Bowl".[1] In this case, which venue name should be used in this article? - Areaseven (talk) 07:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely sure on this. Maybe keep "Camping World Stadium" in the opening and infobox, and in the third paragraph of the lead, say that WWE only referred to it by its former name of "Orlando Citrus Bowl". --JDC808 ♫ 15:19, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Bennett, Jeremy (2017-04-08). "WWE Rumors: The reason why "Camping World Stadium" was not said at WrestleMania 33". SportsKeeda. Retrieved 2017-04-10. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

Aftermath and Shake-up[edit]

I want to raise the question whether it makes sense to split the aftermath section into Raw and SmackDown when the fates of the individual wrestlers and their feuds are so intertwined thanks to the Superstar shake-up.

Let me also reiterate, that the Aftermath section should not be a retelling of anything that happened after WM (and certainly not a play-by-play of the shows) but a "what happened after" about the wrestlers that actually took part in WM, especially about how feuds ended (e.g. Ambrose/Corbin), continued (Jericho/Owens or Wyatt/Orton) or were transformed (Rollins from HHH to Samoa Joe). Neither is it a background section to the next PPV (hence, we don't need to cover the Ambrose/Miz feud, only that the two moved on from their previous opponents to feud with each other). Nor is it a "who returned from injury" section. Nakamura, Balor, Tamina all have zero relevance for WrestleMania 33. Str1977 (talk) 10:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I completely disagree with not mentioning returns. It's still part of the aftermath. I will say that I'm on the fence of whether or not Raw and SmackDown should be split here. A couple things could be combined if they weren't split (e.g., women's division). --JDC808 ♫ 16:20, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What you are proposing is not an "aftermath" section but a "anything that happened afterwards from this to the next PPV". This is not what this is about. WP is NOT a news-site. But I grant you that the difference is a gradual one and that one can always discuss this or that inclusion, especially if they play some part in undoubtedly relevant developments (e.g. Balor as a replacement for Jericho). But Curt Hawkins or Tamina do absolutely not belong here.
Given the brand split, I usually would be in favour of having to split sections. However, we have feuds moving from one brand to the other or transcending them (US title, World title). It's especially obvious with the women (Alexa Bliss losing her rematch to Naomi on SD and showing up on Raw, where she earned a title shot another week later) but also with Dean Ambrose (losing to Corbin on SD, pestering Miz on Raw). And it doesn't make sense to split some parts but not others. Str1977 (talk) 21:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Competing the reason of last edit[edit]

3 Matches were predicted, Big Show vs Shaquille O'Neal, Undertaker vs John Cena and Seth Rollins vs Triple H.CK (talk) 05:19, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay? First two are already mentioned and sourced in the article. The third actually happened so there's no need to put it as how you were wanting to. --JDC808 ♫ 01:53, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About Undertaker's Career status arguements.[edit]

IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO EDITORS, Please Refrain from adding such trivia, reference, quotations, suprce and any other thing for the Retirement of The Undertaker because he has not yet retired. ROman Reigns just said that he would retire taker just as for storyline. CK (talk) 08:45, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:WrestleMania_33&oldid=1201886080"