Talk:Total Nonstop Action Wrestling/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Requested move 11 October 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Only sources provided in this discussion since the name change have used the proposed title. Jenks24 (talk) 15:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

---

Global Force Wrestling → Impact Wrestling – Rebranded back as "Impact Wrestling". GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 02:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose for now I don't believe they've released any statement regarding their name and I recall Josh Mathews saying he didn't know what they were calling themselves going forward. They just named their app the "Global Wrestling Network", so I don't think they've fully rebranded back.LM2000 (talk) 02:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
• Support & Comment Anthem pretty much recently released a statement concerning Bound for Glory & in it, the company is referred to as Impact Wresling, NOT GFW. Not only that, but for pay-per-view listings, the company is refernced as Impact Wrestling, NOT GFW. In fact, in multiple news reports I've read recently, it's been referenced about Anthem pretty much deciding to drop the GFW branding from Impact Wrestling, partly due to the fact that Anthem never actually acquired the GFW brand from Jarrett when it was announced that Anthem had acquired GFW in order to merge it with Impact Wrestling, & because no one knows for sure whether Jarrett's coming back to the company after his time-out at Anthem's hands ends, or if he'll resume holding events under the GFW branding (in which case Anthem would have no choice but to re-brand the company back to Impact Wrestling). 2602:304:CEBF:8650:E004:548B:7400:5233 (talk) 09:11, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

• From Uproxx: ...Impact Wrestling, which probably isn’t Global Force Wrestling anymore, unless it is, or unless they’re partnered with them or something, who knows... I honestly have no idea what's going on with this company. People inside the company have no idea what is going on with the company. The last stable name they were going by was Global Force Wrestling and they never announced they were dropping that name... in fact, they've named their app after it. If Jeff Jarrett comes back to the company in a few weeks, or just sells them the name, then we'll have to have another move discussion to move it back to this name. There's WP:NORUSH. We can take our time and wait until Anthem tells us exactly what the hell is going on. That's when we should move this to Impact Wrestling.LM2000 (talk) 02:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose for now per LM2000. WP:NORUSH. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:31, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose for now per the others. Frankly, I think some other articles were moved prematurely as well. oknazevad (talk) 11:23, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
• Support The company is no longer using the GFW name and is promoting Bound for Glory under the Impact Wrestling name. If you do the research you'll clearly see it's Impact Wrestling again Jeff Jarrett owns the GFW name and when he left he took it with him, it shouldn't be this unclear if you do the research JMichael22 (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

• Here is a source with a direct press statement from Anthem Sports clearly stating that the company is Impact Wrestling and no longer GFW Impact Wrestling Official 'Bound For Glory' Announcement JMichael22 (talk) 15:39, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

• Mmmmm, I don't know. For me, it's pretty obvious Anthem dropped the GFW name and uses Impact Wrestling. Jarrett is MIA and wrestling at WrestleCade (even when he needs time), the titles are names Impact Championship, Josh matthews says Impact Wrestling is going to Canada, all sources like PWInsider calls Impact Wrestling... However, nobody knows what's happening. I Support the move, but we should wait until Bound for Glory. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

• Support & Comment Anthem have used "Impact Wrestling" in all recent advertisements and have stuck a new logo plate over their title belts to cover up the "GFW" logo with an "Impact Wrestling" logo. It's clear to me that the promotion is back to being Impact Wrestling but on a side note, their name debacle is becoming a joke at this point. Bbx118 (talk) 00:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbx118 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. Rather than renaming the page over and over. Lets wait after Bound for Glory to see how Impact or GFW will address this. Unknown 0987 (talk) 12:09, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

• Confirmation from Impact. They've confirmed it;

https://twitter.com/IMPACTWRESTLING/status/922499137601441794 Bbx118 (talk) 17:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

• Strong support since Impact cleared his mind. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 16:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
• Strong support since it's been officially confirmed. TBMNY (talk) 17:49, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
• Support due to their tweet. Previous opposition struck. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:05, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
• Support per Tennessean: That means the wrestling promotion, which is based in Nashville, will apparently go back to branding itself as Impact Wrestling, which is also the name of its flagship cable television program.[1] Obviously this raises questions about why they announced they had acquired GFW and merged with them when those deals weren't final, but that's a topic for another day.LM2000 (talk) 22:59, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
• Support It has been made official, all ties with GFW have been dropped. Jeffhardyred ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
• Support JJARichardson (talk) 18:35, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. No case to answer. The official name counts as very little, as do primary sources. The support case seems to have absolutely no basis terms of the article naming policy. Andrewa (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

• WP:NAMECHANGES applies. As per recent google news hits, "Global Force Wrestling" is now being used for the promotion this organization recently cut ties with, "Impact Wrestling" is being used for all references to this promotion.[2]LM2000 (talk) 02:31, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

• Support based on multiple reports. --Finngall ^talk 21:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Despite the rebranded back in the nomination, this article was created under the current name and AFAIK never renamed. Is this (multiple) rebranding real or just part of kayfabe? What names (if any) appear in reliable secondary sources?

These are the things we should be considering. Andrewa (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

@Andrewa: Um, no. The page was created as Total Nonstop Action Wrestling (in 2004, long before GFW was a gleam in Jeff Jarrett's eye, as shown in the diff which you yourself provided), was moved to Impact Wrestling this past April, then moved again in July. When a page is moved, the editing history goes with it, so the first edits reflect its creation under the article's original title. As for whether the rebranding is real or kayfabe, the real-life ownership controversies around TNA/Impact/Anthem/GFW/etc. are well-documented in secondary sources. --Finngall ^talk 19:06, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

You hit the nail on the head and just beat me to this reponse. Cheers, JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:10, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Interesting... All the more reason not to move it now unless evidence is provided in terms of WP:AT. These naming see-saws are something that we seek to avoid, which is one reason (not the only one) that we use common names in preference to official names. Andrewa (talk) 22:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I note that although there is also mention of multiple reports above, not one of these sources has yet been cited in the !votes above or in this discussion. All we have is links to the announcements made by the promotion company itself, which are primary sources. Andrewa (talk) 22:46, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Since consensus has been reached shall we now revert it back to Impact Wrestling? Bbx118 (talk) 20:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

That is for the closer to determine. Andrewa (talk) 22:39, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

• I linked to google news articles above. All sources are referring to this company as "Impact Wrestling", so WP:NAMECHANGES does apply. "Global Force Wrestling" gets plenty of mentions too, but that's in reference to the other promotion by that name.LM2000 (talk) 02:31, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Jeff Jarrett Ownership

I just wanted to ask for others opinion before i make a change should Jeff Jarrett still be listed as a minority owner. I know he has left he company but Impact never released any statement saying that they have bought back his shares but they did release a statement saying he was minority owner so what do you think?

They tweeted that they no longer have business ties with Global Force Entertainment. Jarrett's stake was in exchange for that merger, which never actually was fully consummated. oknazevad (talk) 19:43, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

American / Canada company

Just curious but is Impact Wrestling still an American pro-wrestling company cause there's report that Impact has moved their base to Canada. Link: http://whatculture.com/wwe/impact-wrestling-now-officially-based-in-canada Unknown 0987 (talk) 01:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source? JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:09, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Does this count? https://www.pwinsider.com/article/113355/why-taya-will-miss-ppv-nashville-office-update-top-exec-let-go-by-impact-and-more.html Unknown 0987 (talk) 12:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

It is now a Canadian company officially and is based in Toronto, so edits should be made. There are numerous reliable sources stating the same thing and it was announced at one of their tapings in Ottawa two days ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.125.48 (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

http://whatculture.com/wwe/impact-wrestling-now-officially-based-in-canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.125.48 (talk) 18:51, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

This is an LLC, a Limited liability company is a US based concept but Unlimited liability corporation is a Canadian concept. Being that it is an LLC it is a registered US business. - Galatz^Talk 15:43, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

As far as I know, Impact are moving to Toronto. The new office is in Canadá. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Removing entity name

Not one person has given a legit reason to remove it. The closest was here [3] which I would love to see an RS back up that statement. LLCs are bought and sold all the time. Now please, someone give an actual reaosn!! - Galatz^Talk 13:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Because this entity does not represent the entire history of the promotion, which is the subject of this article. Fact is, LLCs don't have owners, they have members, and when there is a total turn over of members, or close to it, a new LLC is formed. LLCs are also not publicly traded companies. But this isn't an article about an LLC, it's an article about a 15 year old wrestling promotion that has been reorganized and renamed on a few occasions. We cover that in the ownership section, but to put only the current LLC name first is trivial at best, as it's pretty much irrelevant to anyone except the actual owners and people under contract to them. I would remove it from the infobox as well. (There's also the aspect that it may also be outdated very shortly. As the company has already moved most operations to Toronto, and, as you've noted before, LLCs are American legal structures, so another reorganization to reflect Canadian domiciling is likely.) oknazevad (talk) 14:00, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

What is your source of this when there is a total turn over of members, or close to it, a new LLC is formed??? Its the entire basis of your argument - Galatz^Talk 14:07, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Experience in registering LLCs. I'll leave it at that for privacy reasons. But it's readily available info. But that isn't my main point. My main point is that it's too minor a detail to be the very first thing in the article as the article is about the promotion through it's entire history, which has used multiple different business names. It's just out of proportion to the content of the article. oknazevad (talk) 14:18, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

I deal with LLCs all the time that are bought and sold in its entirety that are then renamed but maintain the same EIN and historical information, so if you want to remove this information its on you to disprove it. Unless you find a RS that specifically states on the assets of the entity were purchased (like WWF did with WCW), then it belongs in the opening just like any other entity. - Galatz^Talk 14:44, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Stull not addressing my point. Don't get hung up on the legal structure, address the point that it's trivia. oknazevad (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Its not trivia, look at WWE, World Championship Wrestling, Jim Crockett Promotions, its right there in the opening. Look at other companies Starbucks, United Airlines, Google, Microsoft, Lenovo, the list goes on and on. Remove it from all those pages saying its just trivia and see what happens. - Galatz^Talk 15:02, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

The lead usually reflects the common name of the subject. ViperSnake151  Talk  03:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Since when? Bill Clinton starts by calling him William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton. Roman Reigns starts by calling him Leati Joseph Anoaʻi. Look at all the examples I gave above. Look at FIFA, they start by calling it The Fédération Internationale de Football Association, have you ever heard one person just casually call it that? - Galatz^Talk 03:28, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

But those are variations of the common name. WP:BOLDTITLE says "If an article's title is a formal or widely accepted name for the subject, display it in bold as early as possible in the first sentence". That is Impact Wrestling. That is what it's called. The ownership specifics can be mentioned in a relevant location. ViperSnake151  Talk  23:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

But you left out the part just below that which says Only the first occurrence of the title and significant alternative titles (which should usually also redirect to the article) are placed in bold. This is a signigicant alternative name. - Galatz^Talk 14:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

No it's not. Everybody knows that Doctor's Associates, Inc. operates a chain of sandwich restaurants. But that's not what people call them, they call it Subway. This just confuses the reader by putting legal formalities ahead of actual name brands. ViperSnake151  Talk  00:44, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Actually, according to that page the legal name is Subway IP, Inc. You gave the name of a franchiser, big difference. I started a conversation at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#Legal name vs doing business as name to try and get a more wide spread input on the matter. - Galatz^Talk 15:07, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

As a point of fact, it was a reorginaztion last year that transferred the intellectual property of the chain to a new holding company (hence Subway IP). Doctor's Associates is now just the American licensee, as opposed to the outright owner of the trademarks, though they remain a major owner of Subway IP, so it wasn't necessarily a bad example. But that's neither here or there. Let's see what MoS discussion yields. oknazevad (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Gail Kim has not left the company

She is advertised for the UK tour in 2015 and is doing British Bootcamp which goes into 2015, her injury was a storyline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SickPup2 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2018

Lucha Underground announced a co-promoted event with Impact Wrestling streaming on Twitch at Wrestlecon during WrestleMania weekend in April 2018. 59.101.72.174 (talk) 08:15, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

References

Impact no longer #2

at some point since TNA Impact Wrestling left Spike TV and ROH continued to stabilize itself with the Sinclair partnership and New Japan relationship, ROH easily became the no. 2 pro wrestling company based in North America - by Pro Wrestling Torch in February 2018. Meanwhile the claim in the lede that Impact is #2 along with ROH has 3 sources from May 2015 and 1 source from June 2017 (Observer newsletter) which has no quote so we don't know what's actually written. Since May 2015, Impact has lost Destination America, Dixie Carter, Billy Corgan, numerous wrestlers (Angle, Hardyz, Beer Money, ECIII, Galloway etc), joined and split with GFW, was purchased by Anthem, TV went to Pop, moved to Canada. I believe TNA hasn't had a house show since August 2014 also. A lot of stuff happened and this needs an update. starship.paint ~ KO 09:29, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Wade Keller's singular personal analysis is hardly sufficient to make any declarative statements. His opinion is just one data point. The counter argument is always television availability, and Impact is in far more homes than ROH because it has a national cable television deal (even if it is a largely overlooked channel). I live in the largest media market in the country, yet I cannot watch ROH on television, I must stream the episodes of their website. That's not exactly the hallmark of a clear number two company. Especially when, in contrast, Impact can be watched every week right off the TV. It seems pretty clear that there's no clear number two, which is what the article (both here and at the ROH article) already says. So no, we cannot use that one editorial comment to make severe changes to the lead. oknazevad (talk) 13:25, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

• @Oknazevad: - I've found the Observer quote, here it is: Okada’s next title defense will be on 7/1 in Long Beach against Cody ... There is a very good chance that Cody will be winning the ROH title from Christopher Daniels ... If he does ... that creates the unique situation of the world champion of Japan’s No. 1 organization against the world champion of the (very distant) No. 2 organization in the U.S. So we have Meltzer in 2017, the most esteemed wrestling journalist, plus Keller in 2018, whom we also recognize as a reliable source, against three sources in 2015, none of which are more reliable than these two with regard to wrestling. In addition, Ryback in 2017 also said that Impact wasn't #2 anymore - and he's not wrestled for Impact/ROH/NJPW/CMLL/AAA since leaving WWE, so I wouldn't see a bias there. starship.paint ~ KO 00:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

• Interesting piece I found while looking up sources for the Honor Club AfD, from CBS Local Sports: "Ring of Honor is undeniably WWE‘s chief competitor." Is anybody still calling Impact the second biggest promotion in the US? If not, this doesn't seem like a controversial claim anymore.LM2000 (talk) 08:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

No longer second largest [4]--Runnel tunnel (talk) 07:13, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Great find Runnel. I'll note that the sources which state Impact is tied with ROH as the second largest are from 2015. Newer sources indicate that ROH has overtaken them.LM2000 (talk) 08:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

• @Vjmlhds: - Please read the quotes in the sources based on my edit starship.paint ~ KO 14:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

The number 2 thing is nonsense, nor relevant to the article or the history of the company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SickPup2 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes it is. For years, TNA was the second largest promotion in USA. Then, falls down to the third place. It's notable, like ECW being the third promotion during the 90s. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:29, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

No its not, it has nothing to do with the promotion itself, therefore it is nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SickPup2 (talk • contribs) 10:03, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Ownership

Why has arlouxe been taken out of the owners section, they went ahead with the original plan as per the source which has been imputed so why have they been taken out and anthem gaining their shares — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.156.145 (talk) 19:45, 29 April 2018 (UTC)