Message for you from AIWF https://www.facebook.com/aiwfwrestling/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by AVBrisbane (talk) 15:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't pay any attention to Facebook as it is an unreliable source. Addicted4517 (talk) 21:37, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Addicted. Can you please help us in the BC discussion? It's really hard. I give every source I can, but the IP claims are ilogical to me. He only repeat that MCW it's behind every source I gave (NJPW Facebook, NJPW verified Twitter, Herald Sun article, PWInsider) Also claims the NJPW tour it's not made by NJPW, it's made by Bad Luck Fale without any proof. Can you help us to find a consensus, I think we're in a dead end. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:01, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Addicted4517. You have new messages at 78.26's talk page.
Message added 13:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WWE officially recognises Global Warning as a PPV as of 2018. It has been added to the PPV section on the WWE Network. It doesn't matter if it is a glorified house show or not. Super Show Down was but is still a PPV. Global Warning was a huge event with 50,000+ in attendance and has been released on DVD twice, both in 2002 and 2018. A new discussion should be created on this instead of removing it. 08:12, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is not notable and you are giving it undue weight. I explained this in the edit summary of my reversion. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:25, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just went in to bat for you on the Melbourne City Wrestling talk page, and left a message for him. Looks like a fan boy to me. You owned him good. 203.15.226.132 (talk) 03:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deserved to be banned for a week, this one. I don't need anyone to go to bat for me. I can do my own batting, thank you. Addicted4517 (talk) 05:05, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just found this looking at the male Aussie wrestlers category and it looks like a vanity page. I would nominate it for deletion as I did with KPW and Slade Mercer but I thought you should have a look at it after tagging it for notability. 2001:8003:594A:6800:2C04:BA78:B9CB:F73B (talk) 10:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just wondering what the deal is with Youtube links, if I know the owner of the production company that filmed it all, and the videos show irrefutable proof of the matches taking place, why do they not count? Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Generic (talk • contribs) 03:09, 12 July 2019 (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) 02:55, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the Tony Ricca page, I did not want to undo your removal with claims that you stated "removed uncited claims, and the one from 1992 - the paper did not exist then". This is not true. The paper did exist then. If you looked up the njpa.org page before removing the content, you would have found that Hammonton News established in 1924. Here's the link to show when it established. http://www.njpa.org/njpa/member_newspapers/atlantic_county_newspaper_group.html. Giving you this information. If you kindly undo your removal it would be appreciated. Thank you Georgivac (talk) 05:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No. Explanation on the AfD. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm contacting you because you voted delete on the article on Tony Ricca. Over on the Commons there are a number of photos, one of which was used in a draft here that was speedily deleted under C4. I therefore believe all the photos there need to be deleted. I have nominated all of them, but Georgivac (who was banned from Wikipedia for socking) is still insisting on the commons that he is notable. I need help with delete votes. The Commons pictures are these; [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] and [8]. 2001:8003:5999:6D00:B5DD:CEDF:C253:4630 (talk) 21:38, 2 October 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) 00:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The source I provided showed NZWPW was a limited company from 2007 to 2009 but after that it was operated by the parent He Toa Sports and no longer a subsidiary. Also the contact page of the now closed NZWPW website https://magglecreative.wixsite.com/nzwpw/contact you will see it was part of He Toa Sports which is now closed. Please see the contact page of nzwpw.com in the Web Archive. It shows it is He Toa Sports. Also you will see here that it is closed: https://www.wrestling-titles.com/nz/nzwpw/nzwpw-h.html Where is the proof it is still active? I'm going to open a discussion soon on this to see what others say. Socks 01 (talk) 00:34, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're crossing the line into original research now. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Pro Wrestling Australia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DannyS712 (talk) 12:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Walwal20 ^{talk ▾ contribs} 10:34, 13 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) 02:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Working on the sources section of the wrestling Wikiproject, I seen you asked, back in January, about a decision on Last Word on Pro Wrestling. I'm all for adding it to the list. Be bold and go for it. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 10:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please help at my talk page, I'm not good at talking to people! Cheers Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done after a few edit conflicts! Addicted4517 (talk) 09:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm going to take a break now. I'll be back on in about 21-22 hours or so. Glad I could help! Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I lied, I decided to check again and what a bully this Socks guy is: please see here. There has been no evidence, so I don't know what they are on about. Hockeycatcat (talk) 10:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hockeycatcat, they are insisting that we take their word for it because "they know". It's blatant original research. I am certain Socks will try again in a few months as he has before, and if he does I am taking it to ANI. As for the other user, he's a hypocrite because he demanded a source back in early April for Taylor Wilde returning to Impact Wrestling (which ultimately she did at the end of April) so he knows the rule is there. I'm about to tell him that on the NZWPW talk page. Addicted4517 (talk) 22:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Addicted4517, are you User:2001:8003:5022:5E01:A19D:81F2:EC55:2A? Cheers, Hockeycatcat (talk) 05:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.SkylerLovefist (talk) 07:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Addicted4517. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Chris Vice, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I have reviewed the content of the article deleted via Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Vice in September 2020 and the article in its present form is substantially different enough to avoid outright "WP:G4" speedy deletion. I do note that the assertions made in the September 2021 version of the article would not appear to me to be backed up by what would generally considered independent, reliable sources. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:32, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shirt58: - thank you. I wasn't 100 percent sure if it was different or not and nominating for a speedy was the only way I could find out. Addicted4517 (talk) 08:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is straight from the horse's mouth...well, twitter page.

Just like I explained, Burton's main "day job" is as a Nashville sportscaster, and with Impact setting up shop in Vegas for a little spell, he's off the show.

Could he come back down the road - of course, but for now, he gone.

Vjmlhds (talk) 04:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Primary source which is not appropriate for this as the page is not about him. A secondary independent source is required, or a statement from Impact on it would do. Addicted4517 (talk) 06:19, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer. This is what someone tried to do using the Fightful person's tweet about a third party (Burton). It is not permitted. Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves [snip] so long as; 2. it does not involve claims about third parties. Both the Twitter link and Impact's You Tube channel are making claims about a third party. This is why an independent reliable source was needed and was delivered by the IP (and consequently updated to the Impact website which is fine - especially as the original from the IP wasn't cited correctly). Just to close this off once and for all. Addicted4517 (talk) 07:17, 2 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) 00:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Would you please review Toni Storm for grammar and wording issues? Cheers! Mann Mann (talk) 08:05, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. there is a discussion in the Impact roster talk page. I remember you discussed something similar in the past. Can you give your opinion, please? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, West Australian Pro Wrestling is a reliable source and not a fan made website. They preserve and keep track of Western Australian Professional Wrestling and in no way are an unreliable source. Also, my edits to the Explosive Pro Wrestling page are not unnecessary. As a long time fan of EPW, I watch the shows and any edits I make to the championships are because they changed hands and I was there to witness them. Going forward, I will continue to makes these edits as I have done nothing wrong and have cited reliable sources. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asstiddie (talk • contribs) 13:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You need to back off.

You are showing some serious WP:Own tendencies toward the Impact roster article.

The man is literally holding the belt in his hand in the middle of an Impact ring - on what planet is that OR?

You want a discussion, fine, but I guarantee you you will lose, as all anyone has to do is look at the pic.

This trying to push your weight around is getting old - the sooner it stops the better.

Vjmlhds (talk) 12:11, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's exactly what he's doing with NZWPW as well. Apparently a video of a title being reactivated from a company's own Facebook page doesn't count as a credible source regarding the title itself, etc. It's growing very tiresome. You ante up a source for anything which contradicts him, "Oh, sorry, not good enough for me. Try again." It's WP:OWN at its finest. SkylerLovefist (talk) 22:07, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is the two of you who need to back off thank you. There is no ownership here. There is the correct application of WP rules and this continued ignroance may have you blocked if you persist. Addicted4517 (talk) 06:42, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the guy using WP:OWN and editing to his own ego rather than for the good of the articles he edits is the one ending up with a block there, chief. For a kick off, they're called guidelines, not rules. I mean, for example, I'd be rather dubious of how correct someone applies the rules when they consider someone tweeting about what they've changed their name to as a dubious or outlandish claim, just off the top of my head. WP:COMMONSENSE also exists. SkylerLovefist (talk) 07:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you repeat that false allegation again I shall be left with no alternative but to take further action. This is a serious violation of WP:CIVIL attempting to bully another user into following their mantra. Addicted4517 (talk) 10:18, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May I refer you to WP:Twitter, where it says "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities,"

So to verify that Darrick Moore is an Impact referee, you can use Darrick Moore's Twitter account to verify it, because what better source can you have about Darrick Moore than Darrick Moore himself?

Vjmlhds 04:28, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. If you want to start a discussion about the personal attacks of the impact talk page, I support you. I also felt harrased and insulted several times. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:43, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HHH Pedrigree: - I'll leave it for now, but the time is coming for one of them in particular. The timing simply has to be right, that's all. And if that route is followed, it would need to be in the admin space. Addicted4517 (talk) 12:36, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I created the new discussion on the Noticeboard. BTW, Skyler answered you before deleted the answer [9] They are looking our conversations [10] so... --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:45, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to take this to GA status. Would appreciate your feedback and comments. Thanks.  — Ssven2 ^{Looking at you, kid} 10:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Czello ^(music) 10:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not looking to fight or argue...I come in peace.

Just wanted to show that I did add a reference where a comparison was made vis a vis FoF and MITB.

And even without the reference, how could you say that they aren't comparable?

Briefcases with contracts, with wrestlers having to climb to retrieve them...looks pretty similar to me. Vjmlhds (talk) 13:23, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since when did getting fired play a role in Money in the Bank? Sorry - for that reason alone they can not be compared. And MITB matches are for one case only as well (except the once but that was pandemic affected AND it was two separate matches run at the same time). For the record, Feast or Fired has been massively criticised. You can't say that for MITB. Addicted4517 (talk) 22:58, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Impact puts their own little twists on it with the pink slip and multiple cases, but you can't say there's no similarities. Everybody copies off of everybody else. They may tweak it a bit just to pretend it isn't a full on ripoff, but it is very easy to see what the inspiration in for FoF. Vjmlhds (talk) 23:11, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can say that, because there is no proof otherwise - other than your opinion. MITB has massive differences, not the least of which in terms of WP rules is notability. FoF has limited coverage in this regard, whereas MITB (in particular cash ins) gets massive coverage. The first cash in (Edge) is one example, and Seth Rollins at Wrestlemania is another. RVD's is notable because of the coverage it got over the reaction by ECW fans to Cena. The list goes on. None of that can be said for FoF. It just doesn't compare - at all. Addicted4517 (talk) 02:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Truthfully, this isn't that big of a deal worth all the back and forth. We're obviously not in agreement here, but this isn't a hill worthy of anybody dying on. I'm out. Vjmlhds (talk) 13:44, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here it is straight from Penzer himself and Scott D'Amore, announcing that Penzer was indeed done in Impact/TNA I get they haven't yet removed him from the website, but that is simply a housekeeping move. Vjmlhds (talk) 03:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There have been reports Deonna's contract is up at the end of the year, but we're not there yet, so she shouldn't be removed. Su Yung has been on maternity leave for awhile. There have been no reports of her being cut, and not all maternity leaves are created equal, thus when she is up to coming back, she'll be back. Nice catch in reinstating those two to the roster. Vjmlhds (talk) 23:42, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job getting the TNA personnel page squared away. Vjmlhds (talk) 03:43, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He's still very upset[11] — Czello ^(music) 08:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Onto it. Addicted4517 (talk) 11:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The current WWE-TNA crossover has concluded, Grace made her appearances, and Paxley at Against All Odds was the receipt. This is more "sticking your toes in the pool and testing the waters" then an "all in" partnership at this point. I speak from personal experience about being burned over these kinds of things in the past around here. I'd just feel a bit safer if we see more down the road to make sure this wasn't a one-off. You didn't do anything wrong, it's just these things are very touch and go, and I just want to see more and make sure before going any further. Vjmlhds (talk) 13:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No it hasn't. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:37, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Going by post Against All Odds spoilers, there's no WWE involvement, which is why I wanted to go slow with this. I'm hesitant to go all in with calling this a partnership, because there's no big announcement from the companies like there was for AEW-NJPW or TNA-NJPW or TNA-AAA. WWE and TNA have done business, no doubt, but a full bore partnership (like co-promoting shows a la Forbidden Door), we're not there yet. I remember having discussions a couple of years ago with a certain other editor who isn't around anymore, when he thought AEW and TNA were rekindling their partnership, and I had to pull him off the edge to tell him it was a nothing burger (and then he just eventually fell off not only the edge, but the deep end as well, which is why he is where he is). I just get wary when someone appears on a different show, as you can't tell right off whether it's a one-off or something bigger, so as the old saying goes, discretion is the better part of valor. I'm not trying to rekindle old battles or anything...truth be told you're actually not too bad to deal with...all I did was just try to explain where I'm coming from. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that Wrestlezone is not a reliable source, even if it came through Yahoo. This was asked on the Pro Wrestling Source talk page previously. Something doesn't have to be all in to be a valid partnership or even a relationship. Forbidden Door is different again because it is co-promoted. The point is when a source is available to prove one point, and the source is reliable - a counter source is needed. Wikipedia is all about sources. I suspect that you were burned previously for the same reason I have criticsed you now - original research AKA your opinion. No one is interested in opinions in articles, or opinions behind removing content. Now if there wasn't a source to show a relationship then yes - keep it off. But there is a source as I provided, and a mainstream one as well. Addicted4517 (talk) 04:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meh...it is what it is. 8-10 years ago, I'd be coming with pitchforks fighting to death (whether it was right or wrong). These days, not so much. Vjmlhds (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Addicted. How are you? Lately, there is something I want to try, maybe you can help me. There is something, I would say, a "concept". For example Latin American Xchange, Guerrillas of Destiny or TMDK. 2 members became very popular, even synonimous of the concept. Santana and Ortiz, Tama Tonga and Tanga Loa or Nicholls and Haste. However, the team left the concept (Proud and Powerful, The Tongans), but the concept keeps going (TMDK on Japan/Australia, GOD in NJPW). My idea is to create separate articles, an article about Tonga and Loa apart from Guerrillas of Destiny, focusing on their work as team and WWE, so we don't include WWE in the Guerrillas of Destiny. Same with TMDK, an article about Haste and Nicholls as tag team, including NXT and TMDK avoids the NXT work. What do you think? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say no straight away to TMDK because their reign in WWE, while notable and well sourced, isn't to the level of the others in main roster terms of LAX or GOD. All of TMDK's titles have been in Japan or Australia. It's a bit convoluted, but material outside of WWE/NXT and the Japan stints are hard to find for TMDK, outside of Cage Match which we can't use outside of match results. I also remember when Nicholls and Haste did their first promo in NXT they did say "the mighty don't kneel" so the connection is there. No mention of GOD at all in WWE (and rightly). LAX I think only appeared in Lucha Underground outside of TNA. I'm just not convinced that there is enough content for TMDK in WWE/NXT to justify a separate article - unlike Blake and Murphy because they won the NXT tag team titles as an example. But thanks for the thought! Addicted4517 (talk) 01:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About Hikuleo there is a source from pwinsider (realible source): https://www.pwinsider.com/article/188254/former-new-japan-pro-wrestling-star-added-to-wwe-nxt-roster.html?p=1.

About the Lucha Brothers, accually was a development of facts, where started that they are signed (by PWN which is a new realible source) but then they don't by pwinsider (more realible source), so yeah you have a right.

About Delta there also is a source from fightful https://wrestletalk.com/news/another-new-wwe-signing-confirmed-delta/ (if you read them you will see that is a fightful report).

--Miki1234568 (talk) 06:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Miki1234568: - As the first source is paywalled there is no way of telling if it's true or not. Usually other sources report it and they have not (this sort of report would credit PWInsider). The last source is NOT reliable and it even admits that Delta signing is a rumour. As it stands on current available evidence - neither Hikuleo nor Delta have signed with WWE. Addicted4517 (talk) 11:02, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please read links before says that this source is NOT reliable, don't sugest about links, sugest about article. About Hikuleo, this is source https://wrestletalk.com/news/wwe-plans-bloodline-family-debut-hikuleo/ --Miki1234568 (talk) 12:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Miki1234568: - Wrestletalk is listed as an unreliable source See here for the list and note the talk page discussion linked. The correct procedure on Wikipedia is to ignore unreliable sources and that is what you should be doing. Addicted4517 (talk) 12:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

411Mania is a better source? https://411mania.com/wrestling/hikuleo-reportedly-signed-wwe/, https://411mania.com/wrestling/delta-has-reportedly-signed-with-wwe/ --Miki1234568 (talk) 12:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's better. 411 Mania can be used, but only if they quote/credit a reliable source - and in this case they did (Fightful Select). Addicted4517 (talk) 02:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate in Vote: Inclusion of inaugural/final champion in Championships and accomplishments. Regards. --Mann Mann (talk) 13:34, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gigi did indeed return, and here is the receipt to prove it. Vjmlhds (talk) 23:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cagematch needs to update quicker than this for WWE and NXT. It still has her last match as March 12. Quite the victory on her return. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a Cagematch issue, not a you issue. You're good, you just used the info they had at hand, Cagematch needed to be more on the ball Vjmlhds (talk) 23:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You gave a very different impression on your original comment, and you may have realised that when I responded. Let's stick to assuming good faith first up from now on, please? Also, it was quite nice to see her back on TV on the most recent NXT. Addicted4517 (talk) 20:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]