Talk:The New Breed (ECW)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The New Breed (ECW) 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

The New Breed (ECW) has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 18, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Professional wrestling Low‑importance

	The New Breed (ECW) 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Professional wrestling#Disqualification|disqualification]] The anchor (#Disqualification) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Merge?

Well since it has been suggested, might as well talk about it. I don't think we should because these are two totally different stables. The New Breed are not ECW Originals so it wouldn't really make scence to put them in the ECW Originals page. 66.235.35.120 07:59, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should merge. When I first created this page, I realized the ECW Originals weren't really much of a stable as they were just a group of wrestlers, so I put a section in the New Breed section called "The ECW Originals" to mention them. I agree with merging them again BBoy 19:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)BBoy[reply]

The problem I have is that this article and the ECW Originals article are, for all intents and purposes, mirrors of each other and all signs point to them staying that way until one of the stables dissolves -- and if one stable dissolves there's no reason for the other one to exist. «»bd(^talk _stalk) 19:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see no mirrors so keep separate--Cowboy From Hell 21:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)DJ BatWave[reply]

Aside from the fact that they have the exact same information? I should know, I wrote the bulk of both articles.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 02:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait if we were to merge them both which page becomes obsolete--Cowboy From Hell 23:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)DJ BatWave[reply]

Not obsolete. Instead of having two articles detailing nothing stables it would be one article detailing the feud (like The Invasion), which would certainly brings the notability into question, but that's a whole other issue.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 02:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term "ECW Originals" existed long before this feud started, I remember Joey Styles using the term shortly after the launch of the ECW brand. So I think they should not be merged. The term ECW originals describes both the current stable, and any wrestler who competed in the original ECW, and there is no way to be sure if either stable would break-up after the feud is over. TJ Spyke 09:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2006

[1] I'm just going to post this here. You can judge for yourself whether or not the New Breed was a stable in 2006. Based on what I've read and in my opinion, they are, but it wasn't promoted as much as it is now. Mshake3 22:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They used the phrase because that was the overall phrase used to promote the new ECW. That doesn't make them a stable. Especially considering how little screen time Knox/Test spent with Heyman or Big Show.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 00:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well there was that tag match at the ballroom in August or September. Still, there was clearly a group of wrestlers that were associated with Heyman, and they at least deserve a mention. Mshake3 03:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And they are.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 03:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not by name. Where's Mike Knox and Test? Mshake3 02:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy?«»bd(^talk _stalk) 02:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Despite what it says at the top, the result was NOT merge. Of the 10 people that were discussing it, only 1 person wanted a merger. So I don't know where the admin got a merge consensus from. Does anybody oppose unmerging them? I will wait until tomorrow, not that I should wait since the closing admin was wrong in this case since the consensus was to keep the article as is. TJ Spyke 03:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Three people recommended merge and nobody said anything against merge. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-07 02:42Z

I did, I specifically said (in a reply to the merge request) that both should be kept seperate. TJ Spyke 04:00, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incarnations Unnecessary

The faction is not in need of an Incarnations section, when we can just note current and former members, or integrate the information into the article, because A: the faction is active and B: it is not necessarily a notable faction.--ProtoWolf 19:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:New Breed (ECW)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, this is a good article, and I couldn't find anything wrong with it after reading it a couple of times. As such, I'm passing the article. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 04:12, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 05:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]