Template talk:WWE

From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

WikiProject iconProfessional wrestling Template‑class
WikiProject iconWWE is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the template attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


Can someone move OVW to former development territories? Markcookney (talk) 19:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


FCW was never a business of the wwe. it was solely owned and operated by steve keirn and had an agreement that the development roster of the wwe was trained there. Like the WWE did in the past with OVW, and HWA. Someone always changes this to 'defunct business' without even mentioning sources! TheAY1986 (talk) 22:05, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Ohio Valley Wrestling has ceased affiliation with WWE, please remove it from the current developmental territories section and move it to the defunct developmental territories.--TrUCo9311 23:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's why it says current by the ones that are current developmental territories. Mr. C.C. (talk) 18:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brand order[edit]

I could just revert it back since there was no discussion to change it in the first place, but I will discuss it here first. WWE always goes in the order Raw/SmackDown/ECW. This is how they list the brands on their site, how they usually refer to the brands when talking about them, and (this one is a opinion) how WWE views the brands (i.e. Raw is the A brand, SmackDown the B brand, and ECW the C brand). This is how they should be listed here. There was no discussion to change this order, so I will support anyone who switches it back. TJ Spyke 17:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colors, revisited[edit]

  • Oppose any color changes, because they are not necessary, and they do not improve the readability of the headings.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 08:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support color changes. Again, this is no different than having sports team templates in their colors, and it brightens up a rather blase template. This isn't about content, it's about appearance. Lighten up. Vjmlhds 14:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is different than sports teams because the WWE isn't strictly about sports - they are an entertainment company, something much different than a sports team.   ArcAngel   (talk) ) 15:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are really splitting the thinnest of hairs here. WWE has an iconic logo and the colors I chose for the template reflect that logo. Also WWE is divided into 2 main groups (Raw and SD) each with it's own seperate distinct colors. The main question is, why do you think it's OK for sports teams, and not an entity like WWE to have their colors reflected in their template. Vjmlhds 20:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Arc unless you bring up legitimate issues against the use of color in templates this entire thing is pointless...--UnquestionableTruth-- 02:55, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

McDonalds has their template in their iconic colors of yellow and red.

Pepsi has theirs in blue and white.

Coca-Cola has theirs in their world famous red and white color scheme.

General Motors and Ford are in blue and white to match their iconic logos.

Of course every MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, and major college team has their template in their colors.

And if you look around here long enough, you'll find countless other templates done up in a set of particular colors.

Face it Arc...your arguement has no legs.

And "I don't like it." really isn't an arguement.

Vjmlhds 14:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After giving this some more thought, I have decided that this is no big deal, and have requested the template be unprotected. I apologize for the trouble.   ArcAngel   (talk)) 22:43, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now please, leave the colors alone.

Unless the Wiki Gods come down and say "Thou shalt not color any templates, any where!" I really see no reason why a WWE template can't be decked out in WWE colors.

When did coloring a template become such a major crisis?

Vjmlhds 00:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is ridiculous![edit]

Ya know...

This whole thing got started when I was just trying to add a little color to a boring drab template by doing it in WWE's colors (red, white, and black).

Little did I know, I was committing treason by doing so.

So let's have a vote once and for all to end this thing (even though no other template that I'm aware of needed permission to be colored).

I vote By God, Yes! it should be colored. It doesn't affect the content of the article, there are tons of other colored templates (both sports and non-sports), and it brightens things up a little bit. Vjmlhds 00:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The vote is on WT:PW, so don't make anothe one here. Crisis.EXE 00:49, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the heck with it!

Leave it as is with the default colors.

My God, I wish my biggest problem in life was someone coloring in a stupid template on Wikipedia!

Vjmlhds 11:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add 2011 WWE Draft. Thank you! --Hixteilchen (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 18:04, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After 2010 WWE Draft. (talk) 18:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see it now.  Done, along with some minor code cleanup. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 20:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


What's a "developmental territory" (group6)? (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Wow. Those navbox colors ain't easy on the eyes. That's for darn sure. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On that note, it's being discussed. Feel free to join: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling#Wrestling_companies_template_boxes_colors.3F Srsrox (talk) 17:27, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2016[edit] (talk) 19:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply] 

This template's initial visibility currently defaults to autocollapse, meaning that if there is another collapsible item on the page (a navbox, sidebar, or table with the collapsible attribute), it is hidden apart from its title bar; if not, it is fully visible.

To change this template's initial visibility, the |state= parameter may be used:

  • {{WWE|state=collapsed}} will show the template collapsed, i.e. hidden apart from its title bar.
  • {{WWE|state=expanded}} will show the template expanded, i.e. fully visible.
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. 🔯 Sir Joseph 🍸(talk) 20:11, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2021[edit]

Change From:
|group4={{colored link||List of WWE personnel|Personnel}}
*[[McMahon family]]
*[[WWE Hall of Fame|Hall of Fame]]
*[[List of former WWE personnel|Former personnel]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (A–C)|A–C]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (D–H)|D–H]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (I–M)|I–M]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (N–R)|N–R]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (S–Z)|S–Z]]

Change To:
|group4={{colored link||List of WWE personnel|Personnel}}
*[[McMahon family]]
*[[WWE Hall of Fame|Hall of Fame]]
*[[List of WWE personnel|Current personnel]]
*[[List of former WWE personnel|Former personnel]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (A–C)|A–C]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (D–H)|D–H]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (I–M)|I–M]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (N–R)|N–R]]
**[[List of former WWE personnel (S–Z)|S–Z]]
Mrtonyntaylor (talk) 21:06, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. List of WWE personnel is already linked in the "header" bit; that's what {{colored link}} does.  Ganbaruby! (talk) 05:56, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2022[edit]

For 2016 to present. Change to 2016 to 2020. Under history section. EliGap (talk) 02:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: There's nothing about 2016 (or any years for that matter) in History section in this template. If you mean History_of_WWE#New_Era_(2016–present), it's a different page and since the material includes Peacock partnership, "-present" makes sense there. hemantha (brief) 09:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]