Talk:List of Total Nonstop Action Wrestling personnel/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

What good sourcing looks like

On the subject of the NEVER Openweight Championship being recognised by Impact, we currently require a better source. Presently all that exists is a photograph of Anderson with the title in an Impact ring. This fails both WP:V and WP:OR. Remember, when one looks at this (undated) image, the only thing the image says is "Karl Anderson is wearing the championship". This is not the same as "Impact recognises this title". Note, according to WP:V:

A source "directly supports" a given piece of material if the information is present explicitly in the source so that using this source to support the material is not a violation of Wikipedia:No original research.

Furthermore, WP:OR states:

Any passages open to multiple interpretations should be precisely cited or avoided. A summary of extensive discussion should reflect the conclusions of the source. Drawing conclusions not evident in the reference is original research regardless of the type of source. References must be cited in context and on topic.

The current sourcing does not meet this standard, as there is no explicit statement being made. Instead we are being asked to draw a conclusion from this image - a passing editor would not be able to verify the claim. There is a reason why Wikipedia asks for access dates when adding a citation, for example. A passing editor will see Anderson with the title with zero additional context: this isn't good enough. Again, the key word here is explicit, which I don't think anyone can reasonably argue is demonstrated by this image.

Note, I am not interesting in removing the title at this juncture - I don't watch Impact, so whether they recognise it is actually irrelevant to me. However, there must be a minimum standard for what a source looks like, and presently this isn't good enough - and it's by no means worthy of an encyclopedia.

A potential temporary solution I've considered is replacing the image with a timestamp of when it is acknowledged by commentary (users have indicated that this happens during the show). This is by no means a good method, but it is more verifiable for readers than what exists currently. I would still like to see something explicit, but for the time being it would be an improvement. If any of the users contesting removal of the current source are able to provide a timestamp and the episode number/date of Impact on which it happens, we could use this as a compromise. — Czello 07:57, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I would agree to include the title. Usually, we include titles if wrestlers appear with them on TV and shows and Anderson appeared with the title (the promotion wouldn't agree to show a title they don't recognize). Also, Impact is in a relationship with NJPW (Ace and Chris are part of the Bullet Club, NJPW wrestlers appear on Impact and viceversa) and previously Jay White was recognized as the NEVER Champion [1]. HOWEVER, a picture is not a reliable source, do not include it. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:06, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Agree, thank you. — Czello 08:07, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

HHHPedrigree, this conflict started because you and Addicted4517 undid myself and VJ's edits to the page to begin with, and I don't understand why Addicted is not getting reamed given he undid VJ's original edit which set this off to start with.

The compromise would be fine if Slammiversary weren't a PPV and their weekly show weren't hidden behind a subscriber wall. Addicted4517 has pulled the "social media videos don't count' card on other pages so while it's good in theory, it's not so good in practice.

In addition, we have a note at the top of the page saying Impact is in a partnership with New Japan, indicating they recognise NJPW championships.

So in essence, this entire conflict has been started and sustained over someone making an unhelpful edit to start with and someone else co-signing his unhelpful edit, and now the source VJ originally included just to placate the two is now being called "OR" even though the belt, holder and company are included in the photo.

Oh, and notifying me of this chat before reporting me for "edit warring" would have been nice, thanks. SkylerLovefist (talk) 08:29, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

The shows being paywalled don't affect their ability to be used as sources (unless you're saying we're unable to get the timestamps themselves - hopefully one of us has a subscription or has purchased the event).

We can stop the finger pointing of who did what - this thread is intended to find a better source than what we've had before, so let's stay on topic. It appears we're all in agreement the title itself should stay, it's just the reference that's an issue. — Czello 09:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@Czello: - I can tell you that finger pointing is a part of Skyler Lovefist's DNA. He has been doing this to me for some time - and I have almost had enough of it. His latest effort on my talk page is the last straw. Just making the point. I'm all for finding a reliable source. That's the reason I removed the edit to begin with - the picture is not a reliable source and until we have a reliable source for all of it (including Impact recognising New Japan titles) it needs to stay off. Addicted4517 (talk) 10:22, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Bottom line, if we're all good with the title remaining on the list, then that's all that really matters - everything else is just nitpicking about minutiae. Me, Skyler and HHH agree the title should stay, Czello is agreeably neutral, and it's only Addicted that says no. BTW, I predicted this exact outcome on Addicted's talk page should the issue come to discussion (now if I could only be so accurate on picking lottery numbers). Czello and HHH are fine, they have issues, we hash them out, that's how this works. Addicted though needs to get off the high horse, because you really do come off as having a self righteous attitude towards this whole pop stand, and I can see how it would ruffle some feathers. Vjmlhds (talk) 12:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

No the bottom line is that any claim should have a source to go with it. It would not be a good idea to appear arrogant over this, as that has got Skyler Lovefist a seven day holiday. I'm not on a high horse. You are, Vjmlhds, and you have ruffled feathers way more than I have. I would be taking Skyler Lovefist's holiday as something of a warning to you. The real bottom line is that we need a source to show that there is an arrangement right at this moment between Impact and New Japan. I haven't found one yet, but even without it if one can find a source to confirm Impact recognising just the NEVER Openweight title that would do. It's sensible surely? Addicted4517 (talk) 23:56, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Frist things, first - that "warning" you gave me regarding Skyler's block sounds an awful lot like a threat...I don't take kindly to threats. Second, all I did was tell you that if this came to discussion, consensus would likely agree with me, and that's what happened...it was 3 to keep, 1 neutral, and 1 against. That isn't being arrogant, just being around here long enough to know how to read tea leaves. Third, being on a high horse means thinking you're above everyone else and talking down to them - never claimed to above anyone nor do I talk down to people - when I said that about you, it was because that's how you come across to me - that you know better than everyone else how this place works, and you need to "school" us poor plebians. And finally, here's an interview with Impact Executive VP Scott D'Amore directly addressing the Impact/NJPW partnership. To quote D'Amore verbatim - "Look, that New Japan relationship, I mean it's no secret [it] was so badly destroyed in the TNA years and we've spent years, literally since Anthem Sports took over, trying to rebuild that relationship and it's been a long, hard battle. Obviously, The Good Brothers coming in helped melt the coldness and the ice on that relationship and I think so far it's been a good relationship," That is straight from an Impact top man's mouth - can't get more direct than that. Vjmlhds (talk) 02:53, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

If you think I was threatened you that is extraordinarily paranoid. I was merely advising you to be careful not to follow Skyler Lovefist's path. And I issued that advice on the basis of you potentially following his lead (and look where that got him). Wikipedia only works in consensus in some circumstances and this is not one of those instances. When it comes to source v no source, source wins every time. It's a WP rule. Consensus can't over rule rules on an article. If you want consensus to over rule rules that is something to suggest to WP administrators, and I think I can read the tea leaves better to know what will happen with that. What I said about paranoia also goes to your assumption of my "arrogance", which again comes from hanging around Skyler Lovefist. It's a biased perception that won't help you when it comes to dealing with any user going forward, so you would well advised to stop doing that. Finally - the source you gave is more than 12 months old, and the site it came from is listed on the Pro Wrestling source list as unreliable. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:48, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Skyler got blocked for a 3R violation, as he was doing bang-bang-bang tit-for-tat reverts - the very definition of edit warring...doesn't apply to me, as I never got there. You're calling me paranoid because you think I'm "hanging around" Skyler too much - this is what I mean about you talking down to people...you're basically saying I need someone in my ear to tell me how to think, and that I can't come to my own conclusions....come on. Consensus certainly CAN overrule any guidelines (that is what they are, not rules - words mean things) on a topic-by-topic basis...that's why we have discussions. Sounds to me like sour grapes about the discussion not going your way more than anything. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

VJ, a reminder. Concensus can NOT override Wikipedia rules. Wikipedia:Consensus "Decision making and reaching consensus involve an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines." That means, there is no consensus if it's against wikipedia policies and guidelines, people can't get consensus to include unsourced material. Per Wikipedia:Verifiability, "All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists, and captions, must be verifiable. [] Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. " --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:34, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Gentlemen, please, we don't need to be taking potshots with each comment. Shall we stick to finding a source for the Impact-NJPW arrangement? — Czello 07:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree. HHH Pedrigree pretty much ended the matter anyway. Addicted4517 (talk) 09:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

It can't get much clearer than this - this is Impact Wrestling's press release announcing NJPW returning to AXS TV. And again quoting Scott D'Amore directly - “IMPACT and New Japan have played a key role in that, forging a strong inter-promotional relationship that resulted in some unforgettable moments for wrestling enthusiasts around the world. There is a great deal of support and synergy between the two companies, and we could not be more proud to have them back on AXS TV as they prepare to celebrate an incredible milestone in NJPW history. We are excited to continue to build on our growing relationship with NJPW, and look forward to seeing what new opportunities arise from this partnership in the future.” Can we PLEASE put this to bed now? Vjmlhds (talk) 13:24, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

forging a strong inter-promotional relationship seems conclusive. I'd probably prefer an independent source if I was nitpicking, but I don't think it matters. Anyone have any objections to this? Would especially like to hear from @Addicted4517. — Czello 14:42, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Not only do I not have an objection I have gone ahead and fixed that before even commenting here. In this instance a primary source is perfect - it is a business arrangement after all and far from controversial. I would have been just as happy with a New Japan official announcement. That's all we needed. A reliable written source. Addicted4517 (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

In which case I think we're all satisfied. Thanks @Vjmlhds and @Addicted4517 — Czello 07:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Partnerships.

Because once again we're back to frustrating stubbornness, let's discuss commonsense, shall we? NWA talent appears on Impact all the time, AAW is having a title match on Emergence. If that doesn't indicate companies working together, I don't know what does. This is just getting silly at this point. SkylerLovefist (talk) 18:52, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

no. Find a source confirming the relationship. That's how Wikipedia works--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, because somehow an article which tells us that a title match from a non-Impact promotion is being defended on an Impact show after Eric Young, an Impact wrestler is not a sign of a partnership with Impact. Kinda interesting how myself and VJ always seemingly have to justify ourselves to people who aren't familiar with the product and don't seem to understand commonsense. It's beginning to venture into disruptive editing at this point. SkylerLovefist (talk) 20:19, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

again, you are including unsourced info based on assumptions. If there is no source stating that both promotions have a partnership, it's unsourced. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:27, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

And if you actually watch the TV product, they had Eric Young show up and announce the match at an AAW show. So, y'know. Something you would do with a partner promotion. It always amazes me how you seem to expect people to justify themselves to you. SkylerLovefist (talk) 21:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Again, no source about the partnership. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I included a source which clearly states the the AAW Title will be defended at Emergence - an Impact Wrestling show. If promotion X is having a title match on promotion Y's show, then it should be clear they are working together, otherwise the match doesn't happen. It's almost like unless we have Moses with the stone tablets on top of Mt. Saini making a bold proclamation, then it just isn't good enough for some people. It really should be just universally understood that Promotion X having a title match on Promotion Y's show = a working agreement/partnership/talent share/however you want to phrase it...WP:Common Sense. This way we don't have to do this each and every time something like this comes up...it really does come off as nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking to show off one's Wikipedia street cred. Vjmlhds (talk) 01:20, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

And as insurance I added Eric Young's visit to AAW, which was posted on AAW's website, where he announced the match. So that's 2 sources which should make it clear that Impact and AAW are doing business together. Vjmlhds (talk) 01:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Just as an aside, here is AAW's website roster...look who happens to be on it - Ace Austin and Josh Alexander, who just happen to wrestle for Impact along with working for AAW on the side (and Austin even has an AAW title as a cherry on top). Just saying. Vjmlhds (talk) 01:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

And as far as the NWA goes, the same applies. Mickie James, Taya Valkyrie, Brian Myers, Matt Cardona, the OGK amomg others work for both companies, and Nick Aldis has appeared twice on Impact shows in the past 8 or so months. It's obvious what that means. As I say, this is beginning to venture into disruptive editing territory. SkylerLovefist (talk) 03:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Nope. No mention of a partnership. As we said with the njpw, the source must say clearly there is a partnership not making assumptions based. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:31, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Seriously, I'm a little bit tired of both of you making the same mistakes over and over. I'm pretty clear. If you want to say that there is a parnership between AAW and Impact, the source must say clearly that, just like Addicted said with the NJPW parnership. Everything you said was based on assumtions. Source 1 mentions the AAW title is gonna be defender, ok. But no mention of a parnership, so you can't use it. The Second it's the same. You are making WP:SYNTH, (source says AAW wrestler is gonna appear on Impact, that means there is a parnership), which is forbidden. until you find a reliable source, the info is unsourced and it's WP:OR, so it's gonna be removed. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:45, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

You asked why other users are always removing your content. That's simple, you are always making the same mistakes, which are, usually, WP:OR and WP:SYNT. You take a source and use it to fit your mind. There is no source about AAW and Impact having a parnership. Maybe it's a one-time deal, maybe not, but the info must be sourced. Every Impact wrestler works for several independent promotions. Alexander has worked for 21 promotions these years. You asked for commonsense, but you are always asking for commonsense. Which is the exception, you are always making it the rule, which is the way to include WP:OR. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 09:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:Commonsense and WP:OWN are also guidelines. You seem to be on the understanding other users must meet your standards and get your approval otherwise you revert our edits. And it's almost always you working against other users on this particular article. Both companies are promoting each other. They're indicated by the sources. And again, we have a discussion where you're outvoted and you're insisting we must have your approval for our edits and sources. It's WP:OWN by definition, and it's disruptive editing. SkylerLovefist (talk) 10:04, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

"Same mistakes." Or, HHHPedrigree, I know it's not something you tend to do, but perhaps you .ight try considering *you* are the one who is wrong. The sources VJ list indicates what we are stating is correct. Meanwhile you refuse to use WP:Commonsense and keep editing to your own ego rather than for the good of the article. THAT is getting tiring, particularly when the guy gatekeeping has stated outright that he isn't familiar with the product he keeps gatekeeping for. SkylerLovefist (talk) 10:07, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not wrong. Sources doesn't mention a partnership, so you can't say there is a partnership. Now, you can start complaining again about wp:own or whatever you want. Despite you block,looks like you learned nothing HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

 Note: I've started a thread at the WikiProject to determine consensus for these sorts of issues moving forward. The discussion can be found here. — Czello 15:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Bandido and Rey Horus

So, we've got Bandido and Rey Horus appearing at Emergence and then booked for the TV Tapings the next night. Obviously I'd like to wait on whether Rey Horus has signed, but given Bandido mentioned signing with Impact and he's now appearing for Impact, would that count as a confirmation? Or shall we wait to see if they show up at whatever tapings they have afterward? SkylerLovefist (talk) 00:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Let's just be cool and let things play out. Vjmlhds (talk) 03:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

A consultant is not a member of the executive

Twice now I have removed the note about this consultant Impact apparently have. I haven't removed it because it has been source by Twitter. I have removed it because a consultant is not a part of the company's executive. Now if it is the case that this is an executive position we need more than the Twitter source to prove it. As it stands right now it isn't an executive position and therefore has no place on the list. Addicted4517 (talk) 06:12, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

His bio says he works for Impact. Read the source before undoing the edit. That's why it's there. SkylerLovefist (talk) 10:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

While I agree that Twitter works for some thing, as Addicted said he is not an exective, so the section is wrong. Also, his Twitter bio says just "Las Vegas via Philadelphia. Marketing. Music. Hockey. People. Places. Things. Logitix/Vegas Guy -@impactwrestling Former #ECW -@WWE- @Cirque", nothing about he is working as marketing consusltant (unless there is a tweet I missed, but the section is wrong since he is not an executive). --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:12, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

He's not a wrestler, an on-air personality or a producer. Thus why VJ moved him into "corporate staff." "@Impactwrestling" is clearly his current place of employment given his bio also says he previously worked in ECW, WWE and Cirque De Solei or however it's spelt.

This constant playing coy just to gatekeep is growing really, really tiresome. It's pretty damn obvious what he's saying in his bio. SkylerLovefist (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

The section is wrong and the "marketing consultant" is WP:OR. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Lou by trade is a marketing guy. It's apparent he does some work for Impact, hence the inclusion in his bio. Now whether it's full time or as a side job, that I don't know (personally, I lean towards side job with all the other stuff he has going on). At the end of the day, I see no reason not to include him, as he does do some work for Impact. Vjmlhds (talk) 12:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Besides, how is stating what the guy does for a living "OR? "He's a consultant, not an employee is OR because that's entirely speculation versus what Lou's Twitter bio says. SkylerLovefist (talk) 17:30, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:SYNTH "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source." The Twitter bio doesn't mention Marketing consultant, while Yahoo mentions he worked as "Vice President of Marketing, Sales, and Public Relations" for Cirque and "Director of Marketing" with WWE. But no mention of his position with Impact. So, that's WP:SYNTH, subection of WP:OR. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:12, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

So, in other words, not what I'm doing. The fact is, he works for Impact per his bio. It's not difficult to find information, particularly when it's included in the source itself, rather than constantly undoing other people's work. SkylerLovefist (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

That's exactly what you are doing. Source doesn't mention any kind of job position, so it's WP:OR. Also, as Addicted said, there is no source for him beign an executive, so no reason to include in the executive subsection. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

But do you have a source saying he's a marketing consultant? — Czello 19:36, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Are me and VJ the only ones bothering to read his bio? SkylerLovefist (talk) 20:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

The bio just says "marketing", which could mean any number of things. "Marketing consultant" is more specific, and I can't see it sourced. — Czello 20:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Not to mention that we should probably have something clearer or more specific saying he's doing marketing at Impact. It might sound obvious, but given that much of his career was spent doing marketing I can see why he has it in his bio - but it's not explicit enough for us to say that's what he's doing at Impact. — Czello 20:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I think I came up with a way to give everyone a little something. Always better to find a way to make something work than to throw the baby out with the bath water.Vjmlhds (talk) 20:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

But what if we want to throw the baby? SkylerLovefist (talk) 21:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Best not to...hard to get a grip when the diaper is full. Vjmlhds (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I can tell. It tends to make them less helpful too. SkylerLovefist (talk) 00:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

So, about those partnerships...

It's pretty apparent AEW and Impact have a partnership at this point, innit? The Machineguns were on Dynamite, Kazarian has spent more time on Impact and Impact specials and PPV than he has on any AEW programming lately... Seems open and shut to me. Especially based on me ol' favourite, WP:COMMONSENSE. Thoughts? SkylerLovefist (talk) 02:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

If AEW and Impact were truly working together, they would be cross promoting shows, having titles being defended on the other's programming, and all the bells and whistles. In this case, Kaz and the Guns are just doing some side work, with the blessing of their main bosses. AEW and Impact are on friendly terms, but it isn't a full bore partnership. The partnership they had before was a marriage of necessity during the pandemic era to help keep each other afloat until things got back to normal. There is a difference between what was going on then, and what is happening today. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:12, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

I dunno, would you define that as any different to what Impact has with New Japan? SkylerLovefist (talk) 04:45, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes it is a bit different because Impact plugs NJPW programming on AXS, had all the hoopla about having a full time partnership, and their guys bring their NJPW belts with them on-air (if they have them). Kaz/Guns are more about guys having side gigs in places their main bosses are cool with. This is a sleeping dog I'd let lie, because I don't need the WP:HIGHHORSE brigade to get the vapors and start their usual spiel. Gotta pick your battles, and this ain't one of them. Vjmlhds (talk) 12:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fair. It's why I figured I'd ask instead of just making the edit because I'd rather not go down the same old road with the same old people who seem mysteriously absent from the article when it's time to *add* to the article. SkylerLovefist (talk) 16:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

All good...really isn't enough "there" there in this particular case to justify making a change, and it doesn't take much for the brigade to start their routine. Just saving us BOTH a headache. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Fair call, my dude. I'll leave it as is. SkylerLovefist (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Referencing Impact's Roster Page.

OK, so this one is kind of dumb and also an odd choice which I'll bring up here so everyone knows: Impact is no longer using impactwrestling.com/wrestlers as their roster page. They're using impactwrestling.com/roster. So from now on, please refrain from using the former for sourcing. SkylerLovefist (talk) 04:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Already made the change under External Links on the article (did it a couple of days ago). Vjmlhds (talk) 04:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Legend, cheers. I put this here for some of the other regulars who may not be aware of the switch as well, plus this way there (in theory) can't be any room for arguments. SkylerLovefist (talk) 05:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I guess they had a change of heart, because Impact has reset their roster page to what it was before (impactwrestling.com/wrestlers) I have made the appropriate change under External Links. Vjmlhds (talk) 19:18, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Can we consider James Mitchell part of the roster at this point?

He's not a regular weekly and he's not on the roster page, BUT he does show up every so often to further Rosemary's storylines, brought in the Hex a couple of months ago, was referenced by Crazzy Steve last night, will be showing up on future episodes and is basically a recurring character. SkylerLovefist (talk) 20:30, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Let's see where this Undead Realm stuff goes...not saying no, but just give it a minute so we can get a lay of the land. Vjmlhds (talk) 23:16, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Referees

I have removed the section because none of them are notable primarily - along with the erstwhile vexxed issue of using Twitter as a source. We really need to clamp down on this because in it's present form it really violates WP:TRIVIA and is really only information that will be relevant to a limited audience. If you disagree - discuss. Please don't try to start an edit war as before. We should be above that by now. Addicted4517 (talk) 01:24, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Why do I have the feeling I've seen this movie before? We've gone through this before, addressing WP:Twitter, and the like. Please don't go wiping out whole sections of an article without discussing it first...the whole WP:BRD thingy and all that. Vjmlhds (talk) 05:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm with VJ. WP: Twitter is a thing which exists which we've discussed before. Twitter "not being a valid source" only seems to be a recurring problem with one person. Leave the refs alone, and please don't ever pull that again without discussing it if you feel the urge to do so. Referees are just as important to the product as everyone else. Not only is it unhelpful editing, it's incredibly disrespectful to the zebras who also work hard. (which a lot of people don't appreciate. It's a hard job.) SkylerLovefist (talk) 08:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

And for further reference just in case we don't want to look up WP:Twitter: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities."

Now, maybe it's just me, but if say, Darrick Moore which is where this argument has happened before says "I work for Impact" on Twitter, and he happens to appear on Impact Wrestling's weekly TV Show, I'm *pretty sure* that as a logically thinking person, I'm going to realise that means Darrick Moore does, in fact work for Impact.

As a sidenote, what's with the constant removals? Pitch in and help us add things to the article some time. It's fun. You should try it sometime. You'll like it. SkylerLovefist (talk) 08:24, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Why should I add anything if it can't be sourced?

Let's make this clear - the general rule of lists is that the content must be notable. The wrestlers - no problem. Other staff - it becomes a problem without proper sourcing to show a person is notable. Twitter doesn't go to notability of the person, and the fact that the person doesn't have a WP article doesn't help. This is an encyclopedia. It is not a directory as the referee list is given it's lack of notability. And then there's the rules about trivial content (as in material that is only of interest to a particular group and of no value otherwise - pretty sure I may have the wrong rule reference there but I can't be bothered searching for it for now). Who cares if any of them work for Impact? Why don't we add the timekeeper or the cameramen if that's the case? What about the ring crew as well? Do you two see the problem now?

Let's see what others have to say about this. Addicted4517 (talk) 03:48, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

It is sourced. My point is, all of your contributions to this website are removing other people's edits. And how are they not notable? They're in TV every week. They're also in the ring every week. We include Dave Penzer, the ring announcer. By your logic, no-one who works backstage is "notable." Referees are called "the third person in the ring" for a reason. Oh yeah, and uh, kinda hard to have a wrestling match without a referee. The reason you don't ha e cameramen or a ring crew is because they're not must-haves in wrestling. I shouldn't have to explain this to another wrestling fan. SkylerLovefist (talk) 08:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Agree that referees are notable to be included I the list. Also agree that better sources are needed. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:17, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Could you expand on the first part please, @HHH Pedrigree:? How are they notable? This question is for discussion only just for the record. To the second part I'll deal with that now. Addicted4517 (talk) 06:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Did you not read my part about "you can't have a match without a referee?" It's not "how are they notable," it's "how aren't they," given you're the one who wants to remove a large part of the article on a whim. Look dude, there's no harm in gracefully taking the L. Those "better sources needed" tags are *completely* unnecessary since yet again, WP:Twitter is a thing. This is beginning to feel like the same old song and dance again. @Czello:, you're normally pretty good at finding a compromise if people aren't gracefully conceding. Your take, please? SkylerLovefist (talk) 07:53, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tag. I agree refs should be included, but on the subject of how good the sources are: verified twitter accounts are fine per WP:TWITTER, but non-verified ones should be replaced with better sources. I've partially reverted your last edit to include the "better sources needed" tag on Allison Leigh, as she's the only one who's not verified, but given that it's almost certainly her legitimate account she shouldn't be deleted from the article. If we can replace it with a better source, though, we should. — Czello 08:38, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

To add onto this, I can see a few sources which cite her to Impact, but none that we consider reliable on WP:PW/RS. I'll keep looking. — Czello 08:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Much appreciated. It would be a lot easier if Impact had a refs section on their website, but ueah. I feel like if there were no sources *at all* we'd have a problem. They're not great, but they are a source for the time being. SkylerLovefist (talk) 08:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Referees are notable because they are an integral part of wrestling overall...can't have a match without one (though I'd bet if you asked Bret Hart circa November 1997, he'd wish you could). But seriously, they are on-air personalities that are important to keeping the trains moving - can't have a wrestling show without wrestling matches, and you can't have a wrestling match without a referee. Not that complicated. This whole episode just seems like picking a fight for the sake of picking a fight, because that's just what some people do. Vjmlhds (talk) 13:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

It's ventured into disruptive editing territory, honestly.SkylerLovefist (talk) 00:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

That, with a side order of WP:Point - taking a flame thrower to a whole section to rehash a settled dispute from 3 months ago just to make a point. I guess some people just want to watch the world (or in this case the article) burn. Vjmlhds (talk) 04:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

And what's that one thing I keep bringing up which rhymes with "W3:Cone?" Ah, I can't remember. Either way, issue resolved, I think. Best to move on. SkylerLovefist (talk) 08:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

I will not tolerate any more personal attacks from either of you, thank you. This issue had nothing to do with any previous one. I'm not satisfied with Czello's solution but I will let it go - despite too much weight being given to WP:TWITTER as a source for notability, especially on verified accounts which have been devalued by the way by Musk wanting payment for them. I fully expect this situation to raise it's head in the future so this can not be considered as resolved, but rather shelved. Addicted4517 (talk) 23:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

It's worth pointing out that Musk's payment system for verification has ended and only lasted about a week, so I think verification is still a good metric to go with. — Czello 23:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually it's not, but as I said I'll let it go. We need better sources. Addicted4517 (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

"Personal attacks." Accurate criticism isn't a personal attack, and the entire purpose of Wikipedia isn't to make a guy with a chronic case of WP:OWN happy. Consensus has come up with a solution to try and make everyone happy, the end. SkylerLovefist (talk) 17:53, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Last word after my break. It was not accurate criticism. But I can't get you to understand that, because you hold a personal opinion above the facts - so I won't bother. The person with the WP:OWN mentality isn't me. If you respond to this you'll prove me right. Let it go for good. Addicted4517 (talk) 23:39, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Mm, that's not how WP:OWN works either. Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia policy before further editing so you don't provide inappropriate edits which can be considered non-productive. This can lead to warnings and potential blocks in the future. Policies such as WP:OWN, WP:POINT and WP:PERSONAL are useful to read up on and help to make the Wikipedia experience an easier and far more productive one. Any further questions, please feel free to refer to Wikipedia policies in future. Thank you, and enjoy editing her on Wikipedia. SkylerLovefist (talk) 09:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)