Talk:Royal Rumble (2011)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Royal Rumble (2011) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Professional wrestling Mid‑importance

	Royal Rumble (2011) is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Massachusetts / Boston Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Boston.

Wrestlemainia

here proves what I've put makes more sense. As you can see, John cashed in his chance at No Way Out, thus not main eventing WM as a result of the RR Devil (talk) 14:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone lock this?

I'm tired of this page getting vandalized. Can somebody come here and lock it from non users?--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 01:37, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One this isn't the place for this and two I have already request that this page be protected.--SteamIron 01:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Miz v Morrison

The match is taking place on RAW, not announced for the Rumble. I'd remove it myself, but I don't want to accidentally mess up the table format.Freebird (talk) 10:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Del Rio in Rumble

The reference given says he beat R-Truth, but nothing about him qualifying/being in the rumble aside from stating he claimed he would win it prior to the fight with R-Truth. Is this an adequate reference? BulbaThor (talk) 00:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He announced he would be in the Royal Rumble on RAW this past Monday.--Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 00:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In that source all it says is that "He said he would be in that match" Not that he is in the match all it meant was that he would like to be in the match. Because of this I have removed it from the page.--SteamIron 01:17, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your saying the same thing in two different ways. And how is him saying he'll be in the Rumble match not enough.--Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 03:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cause that just him saying he's in the match and just because he says it don't mean shit when he's not even listed as being in the match by the WWE, who ever year list who's in the match leading up to the event and they haven't even started it. Look I'm not saying that he's not going to be in the match but as of right now he's not.--SteamIron 03:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Egh I guess we'll find out more tomorrow night on SmackDown

Alright, he's announced that he's gonna be in the Royal Rumble both on RAW and SmackDown. Do you need anymore proof that he'll be in the match this year.--Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 02:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have found this, is it proof enough? Devil (talk) 11:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

40-Man Royal Rumble

The WWE's official Facebook account has confirmed the reports from Joey Styles' twitter that this will be the first ever 40 man Rumble match. http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/wwe is the link for the Facebook page, so that should hopefully clear up the confusion going on right now with confirmed/unconfirmed reports of the change. --82.30.168.154 (talk) 19:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook nor Twitter is a reliable source. You can't use it.--Voices in my Head WrestleMania XXVII 19:11, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable. This includes any website whose content is largely user-generated, including the Internet Movie Database, Cracked.com, CBDB.com, and so forth, with the exception of material on such sites that is labeled as originating from credentialed members of the sites' editorial staff, rather than users.

Via WP:RS Hazardous Matt (talk) 20:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I don't know who keeps removing Kane's name from this list, but if you bothered to watch either Raw or Smackdown this week, he's mentioned as being a participant in the Rumble match once again this year because it talks about his record of most eliminations in one rumble (2001) and questions whether he can break that record this year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.33.135 (talk) 01:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have to provide a source.--SteamIron 01:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did. The program on Syfy as we speak. Are you even a wrestling fan or do you patrol random wiki pages out of some misplaced code of ethics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.33.135 (talk) 01:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a source and yes I'm a wrestling fan.--SteamIron 01:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the show itself most certainly is a source. Not only is it a source, it's THE source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.33.135 (talk) 02:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS--SteamIron 02:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're allowing the entries of Barrett, Gabriel, Slater and Ezekiel to stay up in the article based on the same information. They are not on the wwe.com list as of yet, but they were announced as entrants on the Smackdown program. That means it is a done deal, confirmed, official. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.159.33.135 (talk) 02:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And if you look I just removed them--SteamIron 02:09, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Order of entrants: 01. CM Punk 02. Daniel Bryan 03. Justin Gabriel 04. Zach Ryder 05. William Regal 06. Ted Dibiase 07. John Morrison 08. Yoshi Tatsu 09. Husky Harris 10. Chavo Guerrero 11. Mark Henry 12. JTG 13. Michael McGilicutty 14. Chris Masters 15. David Otunga 16. Tyler Reks 17. Vladimir Kozlov 18. R-Truth 19. Great Khali 20. Mason Ryan 21. Booker T 22. John Cena 23. Hornswoggle 24. Tyson Kidd 25. Heath Slater 26. Kofi Kingston 27. Jack Swagger 28. Sheamus 29. Rey Mysterio 30. Wade Barrett 31. Dolph Ziggler 32. Diesel 33. Drew McIntyre 34. Alex Riley 35. Big Show 36. Eziekel Jackson 37. Santino Marella 38. Alberto Del Rio 39. Randy Orton 40. Kane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.105.63.188 (talk) 03:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WHC match result?

Under results/stipulations, for the WHC match featuring Dolph Ziggler v. Edge, it says under stipulations that Edge would lose the title had he used the spear. However, I think it should be noted, perhaps with a * at the end of that stip note that acknowledges that Edge won the match despite using the spear while both Vickie Guerrero and the referee were incapacitated.216.157.195.66 (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Times Listed

I see time spent in rumble match and there is one glaring mistake. John Cena spent 34:18 in the Rumble, NOT 33:18. I have timed the match itself twice. Please see if we could get some official count on this. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.230.25 (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The pay per view was on last night, and you have already timed the match twice? Don't get out much, do ya? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.68.100.16 (talk) 19:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the official WWE link and they list Cena at 34:17. Some of your other times are wrong too. Please change this. Thanks http://www.wwe.com/shows/royalrumble/statistics11/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.230.25 (talk) 15:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Booker T

Let's get this straight once and for all:

Booker T should be listed as a wrestler form Smackdown.

The Rumble marked his return, and it was then announced that he was a member of SD.

A special guest entry is someone like Drew Carey/The Honky Tonk Man in '01, Jimmy Snuka/Roddy Piper in '08, or RVD in '09.

Those are guys who aren't/weren't under contract to WWE who made a one time appearance.

Obviously, this wasn't a one-off appearance. This is the beginning of Booker's latest tenure with WWE, and it is well documented that he signed a full contract.

Booker's "SD Clock" began at the Rumble, as that was the first show of his return.

Vjmlhds 00:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said there was no contract in place at the royal rumble but as we know a contract was signed later on. So it was a guest appearence. STATic message me! 00:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So Booker just wandered in to the Rumble, and then Monday morning he signed his contract?

Come on dude, you're really stretching it.

Vjmlhds 00:09, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with STATic, Vjmlhds. He was a guest during the Rumble. It wasn't until Tuesday when he joined the SmackDown roster.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 00:12, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between a "surprise entry" and a "guest entry".

A surprise entry is someone who wasn't advertised to be in the Rumble (Tyler Reks, Hornswoggle, Dolph Zigger, and Randy Orton fit that bill this year.)

A guest entry is someone who is only appearing for the Rumble, (see Carey, Honky Tonk, Snuka, Piper and RVD)

It's like all the "guest hosts/stars" on Raw over the past couple of years.

Booker was a suprise entry, but not a guest entry as we now know.

Vjmlhds 00:18, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now it just seems like your making your own definisions up as you go to try to prove your point. STATic message me! 00:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, define special guest entry as you see it.

Vjmlhds 00:22, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are 2 comaprison's to Booker's situation...

In 2001, Haku was a "surprise entry" in the Rumble...turns out it was his first night back after signing a contract with WWE. Drew Carey and Honky Tonk Man were "Special guest entries"...making one-off appearances.

In 2006, Tatanka was a "surprise entry" after not being seen in forever, that week he then went on to be a part of the SD roster, and is listed as such on the Rumble entry listings.

Contrast that with...

In 2008, Jimmy Snuka and Roddy Piper were "special guest entries"...making one-off apearances, and not being seen again for over a year.

In '09, RVD was a "special guest entry", making a one-off appearance, then not being seen again until signing with TNA.

Booker's appearance is similar to Haku in '01 and Tatanka in '06...meaning the Rumble was the start of a long term tenure in WWE, not a "hi and bye".

Vjmlhds 00:31, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.ticketmaster.com/event/0100455B7B5B3884?artistid=807358&majorcatid=10004&minorcatid=27
Triggered by \bticketmaster\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 20:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone Vandalised this page.

The entrants for the royal rumble 2011 have been Vandalised. all of the entrants in caps are completely wrong have have been like this for a few hours. s 2A00:23C8:B097:A601:3D72:73F0:3231:55EB (talk) 00:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]