User talk:HHH Pedrigree

Hi, yeah that's fine that you've reversed my edit regarding the World of Sport Wrestling' woman's title, I understand why. I just thought that now she's wwe nxt uk bound the title will be vacated but what you said makes sense. Thanks again for pointing this out and I will be more thoughtful next time. Boogiesgonnagetya👹

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		Thank you for your help with the Spanish. :) And for being so patient with me.★Trekker (talk) 16:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@*Treker: Thanks. Anytime you have problems with Spanish, tell me :) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you.★Trekker (talk) 14:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited BCW Can-Am Heavyweight Championship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Hennigan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

sure you can I have that option turned on in my preferences. MPJ-DK (talk) 12:21, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited NWA National Heavyweight Championship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sam Shaw (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HHH Pedrigree. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Infobox professional wrestler" doesn't need conversion formula. It would have been better if you "undid" specific edits done by some user instead of restoring an "old version" which is causing my edits to get reverted. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:36, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

👍 let me guest you are triple h fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JARV787 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello HHH Pedrigree, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, ★Trekker (talk) 09:35, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello HHH Pedrigree, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hideo Itami, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mustafa Ali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey whats up! Glad to see your still here trying to make this a good place. I heard about all the Wikiproject drama through r/squaredcircle lol. If you are ever bored and have the chance this source details a lot of the behind the scenes people for MLW. We could use to create a section/table for them on the List of Major League Wrestling personnel article like there is on List of WWE personnel#Off screen personnel. Unfortunately it would be hard for me to do as editing with a mobile device is a nightmare. So if you ever have nothing to do, it would be great if you could add the section to the artice. Maybe if you can't I will do it one day lol. STATic message me! 03:08, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Haha yeah you summed it up just like it sounded like it happened lol. Thanks HHH Pedigree! STATic message me! 18:33, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Triple H, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 17:32, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you link me to the discussion that caused this [5]? I was thinking a promotions parameter in the Infobox would be a good thing, especially in the singles wrestlers articles. But if it was recently talked about I wanna check that out first. StaticVapor message me! 18:56, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Uncivil interactions. StaticVapor message me! 22:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• This issue has concluded btw. It was regarding a certain disruptive editor at the Impact Wrestling roster page. They are now blocked indefinitely. StaticVapor message me! 22:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am in the process of creating the article for the IPW:UK World Championship. I know it was deleted after a deletion discussion. You were the only to vote keep. If you have can help get references outside of Cagematch and Wrestling-Titles.com; that would be greatly appreciated. The IPW:UK official website has title histories, but are not up-to-date. I will let you when it is done. Thank you in advance. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 04:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello HHH Pedrigree, I have indented [6] your comment at Talk:Dean Ambrose to make it clearer for the eventual closer of the discussion. Please revert if this was a mistake by me. starship.paint (talk) 12:17, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to template you, you've been around too long for that. But your repeated removal of totally valid and sourced content in the article WWE Yolo County Tag Team Championship, you seem to be engaged in an edit war and really need to back off on this or it may end up a ANI if you are unwilling to resolve the issue through discussions instead of constant disruptive editing by removing sourced content. MPJ-DK (talk) 23:47, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just a point of clarification.

I only put Maverick on the list when he actually had the 24/7 Title, as he who has a title automatically goes on the list (because when there's a question on where to list people, belt > anything else).

Without the title, he's fine where he is, but current champions always automatically go on the list - been that way forever.

Vjmlhds (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If that was a Dusty Finish and so shouldn't be included, then shouldn't the same apply to the Rockers' title reign a few years later? As far as I can see, the only difference is that the Rockers got to do a few defences before being Dustied out of their title run. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 15:50, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Matt Taven, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Bennett (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:26, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello HHH Pedrigree, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Happy editing, ★Trekker (talk) 13:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply] Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

@*Treker: Thanks. Merry Christmas too :) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hugs!★Trekker (talk) 17:47, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I know you've been very involved with wrestling wikis throughout the years, and I'd like to maybe open a discussion between us about the different ideas about the In wrestling section, to see if we can reach some sort of common ground that can be discussed with other editors and maybe work on trying to improve the problem that has been removing a wrestler's move set from Wikipedia completely. Feel free to contact me whenever you can. PRwrestlinganalyst (talk) 15:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you know how RfCs work, but in case you do not, please refrain from removing the RfC tag over at the Kenny Omega talk page before it expires to get as many responses as it can garner. Thanks. KyleJoan^talk 16:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to breach 3RR, be my guest. Meantime if you think I'm the IP, feel free to go to Sockpuppuet Investigations. Bottle of Milk (talk) 16:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am crazy to put champion with another belt that he/she won previously either same or different company. Abhishek Gandha (talk) 16:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

brodie lee is luke harpers name tho — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrboyo55 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

so when should it change to brodie lee — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrboyo55 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Montel Vontavious Porter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page File (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey HHH Pedrigree,

Thank you very much for the report at WP:AIV. When dealing with such cases, please keep the following points in mind:

• Even disruptive, stubborn bad editing is not vandalism, and thus not exempt from the edit warring policy and the three-revert rule. I personally recommend the following essay for solving such a problem: Wikipedia:Responding to a failure to discuss
• Continued edit warring can be reported at WP:ANEW, easily using Twinkle (open user's talk page, "TW" -> "ARV" -> report type: "Edit warring (WP:AN3)")

Thanks and best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am keen on creating separate articles for all the "Clash of the Champions" supercards by WCW. I am only going to create them if you assure that you are not going to delete or merge them because I do not want to work hard and waste my time in a thing which will go wasted, just like you have done with several special episodes of TNA Impact!.--Mark Linton (talk) 18:28, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Earn from WIKIPEDIA RB2616 (talk) 05:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RB2616: What do you mean? Money? Zero. Joy? A little bit. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why were you delete my article that is AIW TITLES INTENSE AS WELL AS TAG TEAM TITLES. RB2616 (talk) 16:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this notification carefully: it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions to curtail disruption in articles related to professional wrestling. Before continuing to make edits that involve professional wrestling, please read the full description of these sanctions here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

List of former WWE personnel (A–C) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Michael Bennett

List of former WWE personnel (I–M) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Brian Myers

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. FMecha (to talk|to see log) 13:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,thanks for this,i even thougt,that X-Pac was inducted by his Ring Name and not by his real Name.Thanks Triple H Pedigree

1. 25YearsofHHH😉 Karabelas (talk) 20:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sting (wrestler), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Booker T (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:29, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent bold edit has been reverted. Per the bold, revert, discuss cycle, after a bold edit is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring, and it should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed consensus is formed to keep it. KyleJoan^talk 10:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He was the interim WWE Champion after winning a tournament. GiacomoValenti (talk) 03:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He won it in a scramble match in 2008 at unforgiven 2008 and held it for a couple minutes GiacomoValenti (talk) 03:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The had the temporary possesion of the title during the match, but he didn't win it. Not unofficial, interim or unrcognized. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you fix up my typo on the ECCW championship. Because I don’t know how to do it. GiacomoValenti (talk) 02:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		All-Around Amazing Barnstar
		You've taken more crap than anyone else in the PW wikiproject for one reason or another but have stuck around and made the encyclopedia a better place. You are appreciated!LM2000 (talk) 19:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @LM2000: Means a lot. I don't know why, at the end, I'm in the middle of every discussion. Wikipedia isn't funny anymore, I made edits and people reverted them. I give argument and I gain hate and insults. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I second that comment, people will rather give other people crap that work constructively. I have actually chosen to hardly ever do any WWE or AEW articles due to the headaches it often brings with it. Keep up the good work around here. MPJ-DK (talk) 12:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ricky Starks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jobber (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Undertaker did not retited — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew9393787 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add Pedro morals as WWE grand Slam Champion he won all eligible titles Abhishek Gandha (talk) 13:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bret hart he won all eligible titles Abhishek Gandha (talk) 07:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AEW must have updated things sometime during the day, because at the time of my edit, they didn't acknowledge/recognize the FTW Title.

But now it's clear they do, so that's what we'll go with here.

Vjmlhds (talk) 23:57, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What distruptive Edits have i done? MkIc (talk) 18:12, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a question. MkIc (talk) 20:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If i would put that:

List of New Japan Pro Wrestling Triple Crown winners

Into the Page Triple Crown(professional Wrestling),would that be OK? MkIc (talk • contribs) 20:52, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually someone must put the Champions of EVOLVE to WWE,cuz they are like their parents and of EVOLVE will do an Event,usually the WWE gets the Money. MkIc (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Evil is now part of Bullet Club. He's still NEVER 6 Man Champion but does not represent LIJ anymore. So he can't be under their banner. It's a shared title between stables.

Hi. Do you have any source for that? There is any source about NJPW confirming the title is shared between LIJ and BC? As far as I know, EVIL itself didn't bring the title to Bullet Club, he said it's crap and doesn't need it. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:48, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's his character saying the Championship sucks. But he has not vacated the title and is still champion. And specifically he is a champion under BC. 2/3rds LIJ, 1/3rd BC. https://youtu .be/FbmdVkoNybk?t=402 NJPW's official youtbue page. Captions turned on, EVIL refers to himself as a triple champion after winning the HW and IC Titles, as a member of BC. It's silly to say he still represents LIJ when he's no longer with them. He holds the Title under BC and should be considered a BC Title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by T3Deliciouz (talk • contribs) 23:52, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's silly to say the title is shared bewteen two rival factions without a source from NJPW. If not, the Makabe/Taguchi/Yano reigns it's shared bewteen GBH, Taguchi Japan and Chaos. He says he doesn't need the title and doesn't bring it to the stable. The article says he left the stable and joined other, but nothing about the title belongs to both factions. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:55, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.njpw1972 .com/profiles/

He is still listed as NEVER 6 man champion on the site and his profile reads Bullet Club. The title is shared between rival factions because EVIL betrayed them. His 1/3rd of the title falls under BC. And did you ignore the part he called himself Triple Champion? He says the title is trash, but he has no vacated it yet. It belongs partially to BC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by T3Deliciouz (talk • contribs) 00:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of "the title is crap, I don't need it" do you ignore? Which part of not appearing with the title do you ignore? EVIL didn't bring the title to the stable. It's not two factions sharing a title, it's 3 wrestlers of different factions sharing a title. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:09, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

" It's not two factions sharing a title, it's 3 wrestlers of different factions sharing a title"

rewording my own sentence. It's a shared title between 2 factions. EVIL being part of BC means any accolades he holds now go under BC. And that should include his 1/3rd of the NEVER 6 Man Titles. And again , he called the title crap, but he also used it to refer to himself as a Triple Champion under the BC banner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by T3Deliciouz (talk • contribs) 00:13, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you deleting those moves? MkIc (talk) 12:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MkIc (talk) 20:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Can you do me a favor? If the GA review is passed, can you please put your comments on my talk page or the article talk page itself? I may miss them since the review itself is done and I'd hate to miss something. Thanks MPJ-DK (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okey, i will do it :) HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I'll leave them off - unless we get one of those big announcements where they say "_________ is All Elite!" or they just quietly get profiles on the AEW website.

Now should none of that stuff happen, if Thunder Rosa wins at All Out, then she'd go on the list automatically regardless as she'd be the AEW Women's Champion.

Vjmlhds (talk) 15:25, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not doing anything wrong. You keep saying that it's been confirmed with sources. But her returning to WWE is not true. XXTylerGonzalezXx (talk) 23:07, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. We will see if she returns tonight. XXTylerGonzalezXx (talk) 00:24, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I don't think what they're reporting is correct. Even Melina herself is denying it. XXTylerGonzalezXx (talk) 23:29, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Its just hard to trust anything.. Last time there were rumors of her returning nothing happend. XXTylerGonzalezXx (talk) 05:01, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I guess we will see.. XXTylerGonzalezXx (talk) 08:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's time. MPJ-DK (talk) 11:31, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a reminder for you that removing legitimate warnings and notices from your talk page without addressing the identified issues is discouraged according to our community guidelines. Removing messages does not remove them from the talk page's history, and doing so is often seen as rude or hostile by the community. UniNoUta (talk) 17:07, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here's HHH doing a media call talking about TakeOver: War Games and Survivor Series (from last year)

In it you hear him talk about the fact they were considering a Triple Threat match between the WWE, Universal, and NXT Champions, but because of the storylines, they decided against it.

This shows that they DO consider the titles to be at the same level for the match to even be considered.

And obviously, we had the triple threats between the I-C, U.S., and North American Champions, as well the the respective Tag Team and Women's champions, thus showing all of those titles are equal counterparts to each other.

Vjmlhds (talk) 21:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the 28:10 mark in the video so you don't have to wait around for it. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a very independent source, more like publicity. Also, it fells flat when Drew McIntyre said, before his match against lesnar, he never held a World Title before (the reason why the world title part was removed). --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:49, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vjmlhds: I watched the interview. As I said, fells like publicity, this kind of statment need better sources, not just one from WWE. HHH said it was a event between brands, not that NXT title one of WWE top 3. As I said, McIntyre said he never held a world title before, so NXT vision depends a lot. This section says the NXT Title is more important than IC and USA, equal to WWE and Universal, even when NXT is a smaller brand (and still a develoment brand, many sources still using the words main roster and call out) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna star a discussion in the project. I think we need more opinions. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is as follows: user 79.101.205.229 had already been warned about continuing to make useless edits in the article List of New Japan Pro-Wrestling personnel and he continued to do so, despite the warnings. Are you going to do something? Because it's already getting boring to deal with this guy. 2804:14C:5B41:8586:BC92:D2DE:2363:FB39 (talk) 15:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, user 79.101.205.229 continued making changes that add nothing to Wikipedia. This guy doesn't stop vandalizing. I suggest blocking him for persistent vandalism. Do something. It's hard to deal with him. 2804:14C:5B41:8586:BC92:D2DE:2363:FB39 (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Matt Taven; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. I have temporarily fully-protected the page so you can discuss your differences on the talk page. – bradv🍁 05:18, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HHH Pedrigree,

I'm writing to you because you are listed as a member of the Wikiproject Pro Wrestling, and I'm in need of third (actually fourth) opinions.

The thing is, Hartley Jackson recently went through an AfD that arose a lengthy of discussion.
I will try to summarize the problem below.

Jammo85 had asked me for assistance in find sources to a certain fact, and I did find some good sources, but we are still facing opposition from another user in Hartley Jackson and The Mighty Don't Kneel (TMDK).
I would thus like to ask your opinion on the matter.

We would like to state "Hartley Jackson was part of The Mighty Don't Kneel in 2015 and 2016."

I have found two sources from websites of official pro wrestling events (they are archived, please give it a few minutes to load):

• https://web.archive.org/web/20170303035516/http://melbournecitywrestling.com.au/2016/06/18/hostile-takeover-2016/
• https://web.archive.org/web/20160502062934/https://wrestlerampage.wordpress.com/ which despite being wordpress, it was and still is the official website of the event

and Hartley appears on the TMDK side on both.

Also, there is also a listing of his appearances as TMDK here, which corroborates the above:

• https://www.cagematch.net/?id=29&nr=1293&page=2

but this website is listed in one unofficial list of reliable sources as being Marginally reliable. Strictly used for match results and not other information. Takes user submissions but is reviewed by regional editors that verify all submissions before they are added to the database. The other party uses this against us, but I actually think it supports us, as we are actually only using results here. That is, we are not using the blog posts produced in cagematch (see [7]).

I thought the above sources were enough, but there are some more if you would like to see:^[1][2][3].

Can I have your opinion on this?
If you could express it on the talk pages too, I'd really appreciated it.

Best, Walwal20 ^{talk ▾ contribs} 19:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Walwal20: Hello. I will take a look --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:14, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, HHH Pedrigree. I really appreciate it. Best, Walwal20 ^{talk ▾ contribs} 04:33, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WWE.Com is a mainstream source in WP:PW/RS and TJR can be used is we can use sources beside WP:PW/RS unless they are listed not reliable there which isn't the case. It is entirely allowed to mention a list by WWE themselves, like Backlash (2009) mentions the list and I mentioned it here Royal Rumble (2000), please do not attempt a WP:EW, no policy says a list by themselves in not allowed. Not all sources have to be WP:PW/RS nor are they in other wrestling articles and it is fine as long as they are not listed as "Unreliable sources". Also I see modern post 2014 event articles have tomay reviews, while pre 2014 ones have less, also you use dead links like [8] in No Mercy (2004) (just one out of many event articles) in article review despite the sites being erased, yet you do not fix them, so other sources which aren't dead should be used as long as they are not "unreliable", and as long as they are not unreliable non WP:PW/RS can be used, and those like [9] have been used in other pro wrestling articles, even though they are no WP:PW/RS, they are not listed unreliable and have been used. Thank you. Dilbaggg (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dilbaggg: Hello. About this, 1, WWE.com is a mainstream source, but it's not neutral. It's WWE itself creating a list of their greatest events, which is not neutral. 2, Who TJR is? Why is his opinion included in Wikipedia? Is he an expert or just a blogger? The book can be used since it's a published book (not a self-published book). About No Mercy, I don't know what you are talking about It's not just a personal taste. WWE.com isn't WP:INDEPENDENT for a reception section since they are talking about themselfs and TJR is an unknown blogger. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree they just posted a list of their best event, it never claimed that it is shared by others, and stating that "WWE named it on their list of top 15 events" is allowed, it never said that its a Universal belief (though there are countless sources and I myself loved the event tho no WP:NOR), it isnt promotional as its mentioned "WWE listed it as one of their best event", not that it is one of their best event because WWE says so but it is on their list, and it is perfectly allowed to mention the list, nothing promotional about it. It is not being used as a reception, but it is just stated that WWE listed it as one of the best event with valid source and it never claims that everyone shares the belief, it is as valid as WWE's ring names for their wrestlers like The Great Khali being used rather than their real name Dalip Singh Rana. It would be promotional if I said it is one of the best event ever and used the WWE source, but I just mentioned that "WWE list it as one of their best", Backlash 2009 also has the list mentioned and nothing not allowed about it. TJR is not a blogger, they are a reviewer like Canadian Online Explorer which is now dead but their dead links still exist. Therefore I feel new existing reviewers like TJR should be sourced, which is better than using dead links. You can check out TJR, they have neutrally and independently reviewed a lot of WWE, WCW, AEW, TNA and ROH events. For your convenience I added another source from PWTORCH which is listed a WP:PW/RS. Dilbaggg (talk) 08:40, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if he worked on CANOEm he can be used. I saw the website and I don't find an "about me" section. If you want, 411Mania also has some old PPV reviews. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I also added a 411Mania review, its hard to find reviews for older events as the internet wasn't that used back in 2000, anyway thank you for yur help. Dilbaggg (talk) 09:12, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reading Reddit (which is not a RS) there is a WON report "WWF's Royal Rumble is in the books and was an uneventful show news-wise, but a great in-ring show. They sold out MSG with a gate of over $1.14 million, making it the 6th largest ever in the U.S. and the buyrate is expected to be monstrous. Cactus Jack vs. Triple H in a street fight was fantastic, but left Dave wondering about how much violence is too much when it comes to satisfying an audience that is totally desensitized to people killing themselves to get a pop. Dave rants again about the dangers of unprotected chair shots to the head and also talks about the use of barbed wire in this match, which the New York state commission had banned ECW from using just a few weeks ago. Gotta love the double standard. Triple H got a gash in his calf muscle somehow. But it was a legit match of the year candidate and probably should have closed the show. Nudity was promised and delivered in the form of 77-year old Mae Young in a bikini contest (Miss Kitty had a bubble wrap bikini). Andy Richter was one of the judges for this. Tazz made his debut against Kurt Angle and the match was on the verge of being really good before ending and Dave thinks they should have gotten more time. Angle in particular came off like a superstar and Tazz got a lot of ECW chants. The Dudleyz vs. Hardyz tables match was really good. Taka Michinoku was legit injured during the Rumble match when he took a hard face-first bump outside the ring. He and Funaki were scheduled to make multiple run-ins during the match but after he was injured, he couldn't do it. So every time he was supposed to do his normal run-in spot, they just kept replaying the footage of Taka getting injured instead while Lawler cackled about it like it was a joke. In case you're wondering, Taka had to go to the hospital and will be out for awhile so...ha ha? Anyway, Rock won the Rumble and will main event Wrestlemania, presumably against Triple H. " Maybe you can find something with this thread. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:43, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Dilbaggg (talk) 09:59, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pagano (wrestler), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chessman.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You really have a knack for identifying character components and finding reliable sources to verify them. Great work on the article! Hope you are safe and thriving! KyleJoan^talk 12:35, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @KyleJoan:. It's not that hard, I just use the WP:PW/RS, search "name of wrestler + finisher/character" and let's see what I can use. I aprecitate you improving my writing.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited International Professional Wrestling Hall of Fame, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Buddy Rogers.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}}~~~~ to your friends' talk pages.

★Trekker (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Treker (talk · contribs) Thank you so much. I hope you had a nice and safe Christmas :) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HHH, I just wanted to say thanks for the help in the Spectacle article. Cheers for the help in stopping the persistent vandalism from others trying to rapidly edit the page. Your patience and contributions to the Wiki is much appreciated. :) --Pokkeballs17 (talk) 15:45, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokkeballs17: I have reported it to the intervention against vandalism. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sacrifice (2008), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brother Ray.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You said, HOF isn't a brand, and while that is true, neither is free agent.

If you notice, the column is labeled Brand/Status, denoting either what brand they're on, or what their current status is within WWE.

On the men's side, Edge is in the HOF, while guys like Carlito, Christian, and Hurricane are guest entries, and thus "free agents" (WWE.com still lists Kane as SD, so that's while he's listed as such here)

Likewise on the women's side - Torrie Wilson is an HOFer, while Victoria, Jillian Hall, and Alicia Fox are guest "free agents".

WWE.com has a section on their superstar page for HOFers and one for alumni.

Now if you want to list the free agents as alumni, I'd be cool with that, since that's where they are listed on WWE.com

But you just can't throw everyone without a clear brand in the same bucket as "free agents", since WWE.com considers them to be of separate status (HOF or alumni)

Vjmlhds (talk) 17:06, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Hall of Fame status is irrelevant for the wrestler. The brand means if he is SD, RAW, NXT or neither of them. How WWE list their wrestlers isn't usefull. Also, the free agent is very debatable since people like Hurricane is not alumni, not free agent. Edge is not with RAW, SD or NXT, so even if he is a Hall of Famer, he has no brand. We had the same convrsation 3 years ago [10] --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HOF is relevant, because that's how WWE lists their wrestlers. That's what "Status" means - are they just alumni, are they in the HOF, is this a Drew Carey-esque one shot deal for publicity? There really isn't one catch-all answer to this question, which is why WWE.com is a guide to use when in doubt. Vjmlhds (talk) 17:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not relevant. The HOF status is the same as the "free agent". Not assigned to a brand. HOF is not a status with the promotion, is an award the promotion gave them, but the status is the same. Several HOF aren't alumni, like Kurt Angle working as a HOF and a RAW wrestler. Also, I'm changin the free agent word, since unassigned is a better word. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How about you not play cowboy and leave things as they were before you started blowing everything up, and let's have some diferent eye balls take a look and see what they think, and then we'll go from there. As it stands, you are the only one who has an issue with what I did, so it's the fair thing to do to see if others fell the same, then whatever happens, happens. Fair enough..it'll save the back and forth. Vjmlhds (talk) 17:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do whatever you want. Go to the Wikiproject talk page. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:29, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Eridian314 (talk) 17:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes at the point at which the person was that gender. Wikipedia has become a religion rather than a thinking institution and some of its scribes blindly utter policy rather positing how it applies in reality. At that point the person wrestling was a man it is an inaccurate version of history step out of yourself and paint the multi-faced picture in a historically accurate manner. This person knows they cannot win this fight on Wikipedia but for history's sake you are wrong. I am not going to change it back but at that juncture Tuft was presenting a male persona until she decided to do otherwise. Strattonsmith (talk) 17:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strattonsmith (talk • contribs)

Saludos,

Me encantaría trabajar con el artículo hasta lograr llevarlo al estándar más alto, material hay para lograrlo. En cuanto a las referencias, creo que estamos contra la espada y la pared. Hay par de resultados en las RS que están en la lista de WP:PW, pero, creo que para sustentar las historias solo tenemos a Prwrestling, por lo que sólo nos queda incluirla en esa lista. Sobre el nombre, no tengo problema con “Carlito (wrestler)”, solo propuse “Carlito Colón” porque sé que lo ha utilizado en las independientes y en la discusión hay gente oponiéndose a moverlo de “Carly Colón” porque le quita el apellido y que eso estaba implícito en el nombre del grupo (The Colóns). Incluso, entiendo que “Carlito” es una abreviatura de “Carlito Caribbean Cool” y este último también podría considerarse, pues ha sido utilizado ininterrumpidamente en WWC desde el 2004. El Alternativo (talk) 19:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The revisión that was promoted (this one) had the real names of some of the wrestlers between parentheses, which can be used to reduce the in-universe POV. I don’t think that using industry jargon like “Kayfabe” in the prose is desirable, though. I really don’t mind which version of “Carlito” is used, as long as it’s more updated than “Carly”, which he hasn’t used since 2004. El Alternativo (talk) 18:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Buenas @El Alternativo:. En la talk page de las Sources he iniciado una conversación para ver si PRWrestling puede pasar el filtro. Ahora, a responder preguntas :). Sobre el In Universe, nunca he visto que se usen nombres reales entre paréntesis en los artículos, incluso los GA o FA, asi que no lo veo tan necesario. Más que nada, es cómo se presenta. Uno de los ejemplos más recurrentes es cuando se dice que Jesus acuchilló a John Cena en un club y luego se dice que no era verdad. (más que nada, así escrito parecía como un caso a lo Bruiser Brody). Ahora, "estuvo involucrado en una historia donde Jesus apuñalaba", creo que es menos In-Universe --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:24, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't read into "but the graphics don't show him with the TNA belt".

They are just using the same stock graphics they had forever out of expediency.

As you can see here, Swann does indeed have both belts.

Vjmlhds (talk) 13:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Vjmlhds: Graphics doesn't include both belts, so it's WP:OR to say both belts represent the titles. A picture of Swann holding both belts just after he won the match doesn't prove anything. Here is a picture of edge with IC and USA titles after a unification, but the IC title wasn't represented by both titles. Right now, Impact website just includes one belt. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:47, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If he comes out on Impact Tuesday with both belts, would that change your tune? Vjmlhds (talk) 14:00, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let's do this - For now, he DOES have both belts. If on Tuesday he comes out on Impact and the white belt has disappeared, then fine, so be it, and that will be that. But until then, as he does have both belts, just go with that until Tuesday, and we'll see what happens, and what will be will be. Vjmlhds (talk) 14:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You had earlier said it was OR on my part to say both belts will be used...actually it isn't. It would be OR to say they won't. There are numerous examples of having 2 or more belts representing a single championship (J-Crown, All Japan Triple Crown, WWE Undisputed Championship, and WWE World Heavyweight Championship). All we can do is go by what we have now, and that is that Swann has both belts. Like I said, on Tuesday if the white belt has vanished, then that's that. But if he still has it with him, then the same holds true in reverse. He has it until he doesn't. Vjmlhds (talk) 14:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even if there are examples, Impact using both titles still's unsources, so just one title. If next day Swann uses both titles, is included. Until then, it's unsourced. No reason to keep an unsourced edition based on WP:OR. The roster website shows one title, Twitter shows one title. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And as soon as you say that, look what we have here - an Impact graphic showing Swann with both belts as Unified World Champion (Impact belt in his hand, TNA belt around his waist) Vjmlhds (talk) 14:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I have the one belt graphis. Wait until Tuesday. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

YOU wait for Tuesday. I am in the right here. For once, you follow my instructions. I'm tired of you always trying to boss me around. Vjmlhds (talk) 15:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You wait. There are sources in both ways, but the website includes just one. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:19, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. Why should I always follow you? For once you follow me. Vjmlhds (talk) 15:29, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I reset the article back to your version, and we'll just wait for Tuesday. Ok? So let's just drop it and move on, OK. ANI really wasn't necessary. Vjmlhds (talk) 16:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Tuesday is here, and Swann is still lugging around the TNA Title belt, so it does appear that it's a "2 belts representing 1 championship" situation. Though Impact itself has dropped the "Unified" term and are simply calling it the "Impact World Championship", with the TNA belt going along for the ride. Vjmlhds (talk) 01:19, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Now, we can include the 2 belt, 1 title. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm urging you to cease littering articles with linguistically-imprecise additions, such as those in the article Sasha Banks. Your utmost lack of discernment in that regard is blatant - take some time to work on it. ItsMarkWbu (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsMarkWbu: Sorry, but I don't understand. My editions aren't that bad. Maybe not lingusticaly correct, since English is not my first language, but I don't think are that bad. Following the Manual of Style, weekly events like challenges or promos aren't notable (being confronted is not notable, a challenge is not notable). Also, my edition fixes WP:PROSELINE (On XX, she did something, on XX, she did something). Also, the style and persona section is necessary and the source explains her finisher. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:32, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree: You have an undisputable right to trim pages when conventional, no doubt about it. However, a lot of your additions boast an abundance of mistakes, and it's okay to recognize that. Food for thought. ItsMarkWbu (talk) 21:37, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree: And yet, you couldn't even spell her finisher's name right - it's the "Bank Statement", NOT the "Banks Statement." ItsMarkWbu (talk) 21:39, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ItsMarkWbu: OK, I will be more carefull in the future --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:52, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HI, it is regarding this. I wonder why these guys are manual reverting to unsourced 1979 birth year. Is the DoB contentious? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:54, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: I don't know. Several years ago, sources reported two dates, but now, we have one solid source. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:57, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we should revert it back right? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:15, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your feedback. I will try to improve everything that you recommended. I considered Rik Bugez an important topic since he has had some time with WWE now and there are some good palpable references spreaded across Google that can make a notable article. As per his matches/appearances in NXT, that's exactly what I tried. Finding those matches in which he faced notable oponents such as Balor, battle royals, etc. And yeah, it's hard to place him into his WWE whereabouts since he's not yet signed nor he hasn't got any profile on the site. If you consider I need help with further editing the article just let me know. Thanks for your time. Best regards. --JeyReydar97 (talk) 12:46, 21 April 2021 (UTC +3)

Thank you I appreciate your comment completely understand iv seen the "and" used in that form as a link before so it's always been a way for me to do it. Also had this talk years ago about it in a talk page I was told if the "and" is used as a link it highlighted in blue as compared to it being unlinked to which will show a nonpage. But regardless I understand Eerie Holiday (talk) 14:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of former WWE personnel (N–R), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Catherine Perry.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 14/6 => 4. Piper Niven (w/Eva Marie) vs. Naomi. The broadcast team acted like they were unfamiliar with Niven, who dominated Naomi. Niven performed a Michinoku Driver on Naomi and pinned her clean.... No mention of her new name.
• 21/6 => Backstage, Kevin Patrick approached Eva Marie and her friend. Eva claimed she had a cold last week. She said she knows the fans are dying to see her return to the ring, so she brought in her protege. Eva asked her name. She appeared as if she was about to say Piper Niven, but Eva cut her off and said her name is Doudrop..[11] Wario-Man ^talk 09:45, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wario-Man: I know. So? According to the project, the careers included notable and key points of the career. I don't see being unnamed for one day as notable. That's one of the problems of the project, depends so much on WP:PROSELINE (also, avoids WP:IN-UNIVERSE a little bit). Week 1, she made something. Week 2, she reveal her ring name. Why not "She began to work in RAW under the name of XX"? We avoid proseline in such way. The order doesn't affect the result: she began to work under a new name and the unnamed part isn't even necessary to mention. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about your wording. It's about the order of citations. Debut match was in 14 June, new name appeared in 21 June. But you put 21 before 14 which would be confusing for our readers when they click on those sources. You see, I didn't revert/change the previous revision by you. I'm OK if you restore this or put both citations in the end in proper order (debut + name). Wario-Man ^talk 09:56, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wario-Man: Ok, I will do it once i'm more free. My main purpose this months is to avoid proseline and in-universe. Most articles have a huge amount of details that can be summarized. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:01, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen your edits on the other articles and your contributions are good; e.g. your recent contributions to Piper Niven ([12][13]) are helpful. Your points about "too much detailed stuff" are valid. I myself remove unnecessary stuff as much as I can. But we should review our edits to avoid errors, confusion, and mistakes. Cheers! Wario-Man ^talk 10:26, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted a chunk of your revisions for a multitude of reasons but wanted to explain.

By the time Deville feuded with Rose, the duo Fire and Desire was no more, so it makes little sense to say that the feud happened under a no-longer-existent team name at that time.

Deville was not included [as part of Rose's storyline with Otis and Ziggler] on the April 3 episode of SmackDown. She was there the whole time, still teaming with Rose. The first sentence of that paragraph signifies a shift in Deville and Rose's partnership that led to its end, which is why it is an appropriate section opener.

This sentence (i.e., Later that month, Deville called Rose out to brand her selfish, vow to "ruin Rose's life", and attack her.) is important to include because without it, it sounds like Deville and Rose were simply on different sides of the Otis and Ziggler feud until Deville cut Rose's hair in July, which is false. Deville's post-WrestleMania promo about Rose was an important point that ignited the singles competition portion with minimal involvement from Otis and Ziggler.

To respond to your comment about Deville being a character, not a real authority figure, no one was saying otherwise. My point was the original phrasing of the information already says this. In addition, I've never seen the term "authority figure" used to describe actual executives in a way that encompasses both their on and off-screen roles (e.g., Stephanie McMahon's character is described as an authority figure but not WWE's CBO, and her CBO position is never described as an authority figure role), so the term seems self-explanatory. It's also incorrect to say: She also began to work on Raw as an on-screen authority figure. The only manner in which this paraphrase of the two sources was different than the previous sentence was the insinuation that her character does not work under Pearce on Raw, and according to the sources cited, that is false.

The addition about the SummerSlam match change was great. That said, I took the liberty of tightening up its grammatical structure, which is also a reason for the partial revert. Regarding this phrase (i.e., Deville and Rose had No Disqualification Loser Leaves WWE match), in addition to missing an "a", two people having a match just sounds ambiguous. What did they do in the match? They competed. Who won? Rose did. Then just say Deville (as the subject of the article) lost.

I hope that's all clear. Cheers! KyleJoan^talk 19:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@KyleJoan:Hello. First of all, thanks for rewrite the summerSlam section. You know, English isn't my first language, so I want to express something but I can't and just write simple sentences. About the issues. 1, the Fire and Desire. I think you haven't to be so rigid. It's just one paragraph about a storyline with her former tag team partner. I think it's better, since we don't include Singles competition in the next section. (also, looks like she is gonna be an AF for a long time). 2, "After Rose entered a love triangle with Otis and Dolph Ziggler in 2020,", this must to be changed. Per WP:IN-Universe, for a casual reader looks like Rose had a real love triangle with Otis and Ziggler a la Lita, Edge, Hardy. As I said, "Rose was involved in a romantic storyline with" is better. 3, the "ruin Rose's life" part. I don't think it's necessary. It's just a in-universe reason for the feud, not a very notable one. 4, the AF decisions, I prefer to avoid them, since IPs would include every decision she makes (and not every decision is notable). If you want, to can rewrite this parts, like you did with the SummerSlam part. As I said, I want to keep the In Universe to the min. level. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I understand. (1) I don't think anyone's being rigid. We have differing opinions about where to place headings, and that's fine. My point is that Deville's feud with Rose is her only singles competition storyline, which makes it an appropriate beginning of a section separate from her tag team run. It also fits the theme of Deville being without a partner as both a wrestler and authority figure. How long she remains the latter is irrelevant because making that one paragraph into its own section would not meet MOS:OVERSECTION. (2) Adding the description "storyline" to write "storyline love triangle" solved this issue. (3) It is necessary. Without it, there's no indication of a feud until the abrupt haircut. We'd basically write: "Deville helped Ziggler, but Rose chose Otis, after which the duos tagged. Deville cut Rose's hair. Deville lost." Keeping in-universe details to a minimum is great, but it can't be prioritized over presenting content in a way that makes sense and flows smoothly. (4) An IP did not add the decisions, an experienced user did, and I happen to agree with them (for the time being). I could see the argument to simply state that Deville "became the assistant to on-screen authority figure Adam Pearce" generally on both Raw and SmackDown, but that seems simplistic at this time, especially since the decisions documented don't overwhelm the article. KyleJoan^talk 20:58, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As of now, nothing is in the pipeline. They're talking, and maybe down the road something may come up, but as of now, they're both doing their own thing.

Vjmlhds (talk) 01:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, i missed it. I know about CMLL-ROH, but not about ROH-NJ --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:10, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To summarize, it looked like ROH and NJPW were gonna do something (likely G1 Supercard II) during WM 36 weekend, but then Covid turned everything sideways, ROH went on hiatus for 5 months, NJPW got chummy with AEW and Impact, ROH came back and essentially started over from scratch, AEW, Impact, NWA, NJPW, and AAA all kinda got together and are doing all kinds of interpromotional mix-and-match stuff, WWE just got out ThunderDome, and ROH in it's own little world onto itself. That's pretty much how everything stands at this point. Vjmlhds (talk) 03:00, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When you get a chance please go over your most recent edit to Ricochet_(wrestler) because there is two duplicate sections of Professional wrestling career of Ricochet_(wrestler).

Take a look at sections 2 & 3 of of Professional wrestling career of Ricochet_(wrestler), they are the same, by the way how come there is two duplicate sections of Professional wrestling career of Ricochet_(wrestler). There is should be only one section of section of Professional wrestling career of Ricochet_(wrestler) and not two. Chip3004 (talk) 22:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're quite well-known in the Wikipedia Wrestling community, I'd like you to help me get a discussion started on splitting the Rascalz and MSK's pages. Myron Reed and Trey Miguel are using the Rascalz name now on the Indies. I've linked Trey's original Tweet on the talk page of the MSK article, and Trey has posted a picture of an Indy event he and Myron wrestled at as the Rascalz on his Instagram. SkylerLovefist (talk) 06:11, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Photo is copyrighted and re-edited

the photo has copyright, so we can't use it. You just upload it without any kind of permission--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:23, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Photo is copyrighted and re-edited KhoiDech (talk) 12:24, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

same. No permission from wwe to use this picture--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:25, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved on the Buddy Murphy page. Thank you. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:47, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested the page be protected for a month at WP:RPP. It is really getting ridiculous. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:26, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Memphis Wrestling Hall of Fame, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Midnight Express.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you have time, take a look at Lana (wrestler). Seems IP-users have added a lot of non-notable matches/stuff and unnecessary details to the article. It may need cleanup. Cheers! Wario-Man ^talk 13:51, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry @Wario-Man:, I'm taking a Wikipedia:Wikibreak. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support of my position on matters on his talk page and on the Impact Personnel list. Frankly if anyone is guilty of hounding right now it's him - see for example his revert on the project sources page where I added IMDB for completeness to formalise that source to not be used for wrestler's real names. I'm about to put that back with the harassment policy in the edit summary per what you may have seen on his talk page from Ponyo. As of late this user has been very uncivil in his policy interpretations (which contrary to his view have in fact been wrong as I think you identified) and I can certainly see a block in his future if he doesn't cease this battleground attitude (as Ponyo put it). Addicted4517 (talk) 23:46, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Addicted4517: Yes. I tried to help and explain the situation, but he is to agressive. If you want to do something, fine. This kind of coments doesn't help either. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:20, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo has done it - blocked for 72 hours. Addicted4517 (talk) 07:07, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Well, I hope he reconsider his attitude --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:21, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of former WWE personnel (D–H), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Hennigan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ya You always ready to delete my articles all the time. So from today I also watch your all the articles. And You Are like Nick Khan of Wikipedia who always there to remove the article. King Rudra 12:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @King Rudra: I'm not ready to delete your articles. But, some of the articles you create are no notable. The last one C4, it's a small promotion and you didn't include enough sources to prove the notability, besides routine results. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:21, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you choose to create articles about independent wrestlers or promotions, you have to prove they are notable with reliable sources talking about the subject (so, if the subject is independent, it's harder). C4 has 40 sources, but all of them are from Cagematch, a source that doesn't prove notability. N 22 it's a unproven source and doesn't talk about C4, but about Mike. Also, the article doesn't have history section, just title histories. On the other hand, I think you do a great work with the titles, keeping the champions to date. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:34, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But if other editor come and see the article to help in improvements it's great help for me. As I see there are only few people can reach that article King Rudra 16:49, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]