Jump to content

Talk:Bragging Rights (2009)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like Cyber Sunday?

[edit]

So, this will still be like Cyber Sunday from last year, just with a different name? Danny Boy 420 (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown at this time. TJ Spyke 00:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the poster is a fake. I tried to delete it but it was reversed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.189.55 (talk) 23:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's because it's not fake. It's right from In Demand, meaning it's real. TJ Spyke 00:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless it is missing the normal things found on the bottom of most WWE posters such as the WWE HD Logo, TV PG Logo, WWE Logo, Only on PPV note, etc. I don't remember the last time I saw a poster without them, that is highly suspicious. 65.8.203.244 (talk) 05:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC) DiSaStA[reply]

Well you can take that up with WWE's design and marketing departments... Due to the poster being acquired from In Demand's (an official PPV supplier of WWE in the United States) official website, everything indicates the poster is official... --UnquestionableTruth-- 06:47, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well the Mellon Arena website has a completely different logo than the poster does, <http://www.mellonarena.com/site.php?pageID=4&eID=341> so clearly someone got crossed up. I tend to believe the website because Randy Orton hasn't done that pose in a while, but I guess it's a wait and see type of deal. 98.64.64.21 (talk) 03:16, 26 September 2009 (UTC) DiSaStA[reply]

Image

[edit]

why was the image changed the first image was an offical poster so why was it changed.--Dcheagle (talk) 07:44, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lets address this image issue The Current Picture in the article is the official Poster for this event it was found on in demand site a major PPV provider. I know that its lacking the usual logos that go at the bottom of the posters but as of right now this is the official poster and if and when WWE changes the poster then and only then should we change the image.--Dcheagle (talk) 05:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PPV providers, SKY TV New Zealand and Main Event Australia have this logo. Others do too but I'm not sure what they were. The WWE Universe website also has the logo. It has also been featured in magazines such as the SKYWATCH! Plus the mellon arena site. InDemand is only one provider! Also I believe the new logo because it is made up of the fonts of the Raw and SmackDown logos. This suits the theme "Bragging Rights" which the two brands will fight for in the main event. This description is also found from many PPV providers. Randy Orton also doesn't do that pose anymore. That poster is an old version. I think this logo should be on the Bragging Rights article until a new poster is released. Thanks, WWE Socks 00:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the official poster for this ppv. And just cause you think the use of reds and blues suits the theme does not mean its the official poster so please re frame from changing it.--Dcheagle (talk) 00:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to point out that the eventual broadcast logos for Extreme Rules, Night of Champions and currently Hell in a Cell don't match up to the ones in their posters. We do not necessarily change them or remove them because the logo is not current or a wrestler is injured/outdated/etc. --  Θakster   08:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is the poster on the offical site for this ppv the Offical one or is the one it article the offical one.--Dcheagle (talk) 07:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well the wallpaper is the most recent one but we don't tend to use WWE.com wallpaper for the infobox. We usually use the one featured on WWEShop.com as it matches the poster dimensions so hopefully, an updated poster will come up in the next couple of days. --  Θakster   07:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that answers my question thanks.--Dcheagle (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would just like to point out that the official logo that a few of us tried to add to this article that was dubbed "obviously not an official logo" is, in fact, the official logo for this pay per view. http://www.wwe.com/shows/wwebraggingrights/ Wwehurricane1 (talk) 20:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Acting like an ass won't help you. Also, no one said it wasn't an "official logo". TJ Spyke 21:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you did just that. In those exact words. By clicking on the history of the article you'll see that you used the words "unofficial logo," "obviously not the logo," and "may have been a temp logo." Wwehurricane1 (talk) 22:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

jeff hardy

[edit]

someone said he is returning at this ppv —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.24.110.35 (talk) 01:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as Jeff Hardy is no longer working for WWE I dont see this happening.--Dcheagle (talk) 01:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so considering he's probably going to jail for 11 years. KingRaven (>$.$)> (talk) 09:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the fact that even if he is guilty (which we don't know), he won't be going to jail anytime soon since he hasn't even had his trial start and it won't start before the BR PPV. I know he won't be on the PPV, but he could if he wanted to and if WWE wanted him too. TJ Spyke 15:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
yes he could be there but i doubt it but you never know.--Dcheagle (talk) 00:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lol 98.109.135.106 (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does Sykes "know he won't be there"? does he work for the WWE?. That's original thought which i thought wasn't allowed (Punisher88 (talk) 01:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]
The fact that Jeff Hardy no longer works for the WWE in real life means he won't be there. MrUnoriginal (talk) 04:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wwe bragging rights

[edit]

taker vs batista vs punk vs rey for world title —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.107.93.23 (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not till the show airs.--Dcheagle (talk) 21:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is ECW's role?

[edit]

Anyone else notice that this will make the 2nd ppv in a row without a majoy ECW title match if this is truely between raw and smackdown? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.7.201.91 (talk) 07:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They just started announcing matches this week, don't assume their won't be a ECW title match (especially since the ECW title match is usually one of the last matches announced for the PPV). TJ Spyke 16:02, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was announced a few weeks ago that a new number one contender needed to be chosen, but I believe there willbe an ECW title match with the #1 contender(s) being announced on Tuesday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdaylight844 (talk • contribs) 21:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC) And even if there isn't, so what? There are several titles that haven't been defended in who knows how long.--Lord Dagon (talk) 01:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Main event

[edit]

Jericho announced that it will be a 7-7 main event should that be added to the matches?--Kevmicester2000 (talk) 01:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Triple H and Jericho both said they will be in the match should we add there names to the teams? --Kevmicester2000 (talk) 01:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember correctly, when the first announced this match that it would feature of the winners of perspective matches at the Bragging Rights Pay-Per-View & those would be in the match. Had that been changed or am I maybe misunderstood what they said? I guess they may have referred to the winners of the qualifiying matches. Anyone else catch this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvibert (talk • contribs) 02:35, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is indeed what they said when they announced the match (that it would be the winners of matches earlier in the night). Apparently in the 1 week after it was announced, they changed their mind. TJ Spyke 02:41, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks. Thought I was going crazy there for a moment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvibert (talk • contribs) 03:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Premature adding

[edit]

Someone added the smackdown team, and Mark Henry on the Raw team. Smackdown and Superstars havn't been aired yet, so should they be removed? 69.136.158.111 (talk) 12:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --  Θakster   14:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't me, but http://www.pwmania.com/newsarticle.php?page=257513021 Is the policy to wait until it has actually aired? Cold Phront (talk) 17:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the policy. TJ Spyke 15:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In raw they announced that the last spot in raw team would be a Mark Henry against Chris Masters at Superstars. I think it is worth adding it for now. DinobotTM2 (talk) 04:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hence why it says "TBD" (To be determined). We don't list possible entrants, after the match airs the winner will be listed. TJ Spyke

Michelle McCool was announced to be facing a Raw Diva on Smackdown last Friday. Should this be added with her opponent TBA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdaylight844 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not censor "spoilers." (See WP:Spoilers for instance) The issue here regarding adding someone to the team before the match airs (such as one that might air on Friday's edition of Smackdown for instance) is that it would need a reliable source to back it up. ECW, Superstars & Smackdown is taped prior to airing and you can easily find "spoilers" for them, but the credibility of the information could be questioned if added here. Mizery Made (talk · contribs) 03:54, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In England and Australia, Smackdown is shown on Thursdays and was already shown that Team Smackdown just got completly changed. So, im adding the new team. 189.102.106.173 (talk) 21:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We get SmackDown on Friday in England Smackdownraw (talk) 16:54, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a SUPERCARD?

[edit]

Can this ppv be concidered a "supercard"? if anyong agrees or disagrees, please say so.--JereMerr 22:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)--JereMerr 22:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremerr (talk • contribs)

If you are looking for general opinions this is not the place to ask. If you were asking because you want to use the term suspercard in the article it can't be added unless it was either promoted as one or reliable secondary sources use the term to describe the event.--70.24.178.75 (talk) 00:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have one: the wikipedia article says that a supercard is a show in which there are more than 1 main event. THIS PPV HAD 3--JereMerr 03:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)--JereMerr 03:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremerr (talk • contribs)

Trophy

[edit]

Could anyone that attended this event please upload an image of the trophy? Thanks, WWE Socks 03:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I aggree this should be mentioned and a photo should be placed in as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would a screenshot of the trophy be allowed or not? WWE Socks 03:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would fall under fair-use, and in this case an image of the trophy can wait. Actually get the article expanded before worrying about images.--WillC 03:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone place the trophy photo up it has been nearly 3 months.--Cooly123 17:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

john cena vs randy orton

[edit]

can you please put the score up i want to know —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.24.110.35 (talk) 23:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Bragging Rights (2009). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:26, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bragging_Rights_(2009)&oldid=1199778594"