Jump to content

Talk:Brian Kendrick

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBrian Kendrick 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.
Good topic starBrian Kendrick is part of the Paul London and Brian Kendrick series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 5, 2008Good article nomineeListed
June 11, 2009Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Merge

[edit]

I merged all of the information in Sliced Bread No. 2 into this article per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sliced Bread No. 2. I have no idea if this information is accurate and I wouldn't have the first idea of how to find a source for it. Could someone who actually knows something about this please check it out? Thanks --- Deville (Talk) 02:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yea that info is mainly wrong or metioned with in the moves page discription so i have deleted it --- Paulley

heel turn

[edit]

Kendrick recently turned heel. As evidence by his teaming with the heels last night, so i think it should be added that he is now a heel. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.243.107 (talk) 00:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley?

[edit]

Why does it say she became the valet of Kendrick and London a few months ago, during the second fued with MNM? She has been with them long before that.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zack Shadow (talk • contribs) 07:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Stop

[edit]

Who ever keeps restoring that terrible photo Stop! Please! Use common sense that photo is terrible TonyWWE 22:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC) TonyWWE[reply]

You do not have permission to use the photo you keep trying to add. All rights are reserved. - Deep Shadow 01:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that's fine I will make sure I find a better photo.TonyWWE 18:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC) TonyWWE[reply]
Make sure it has the correct Creative Commons license - Deep Shadow 18:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-GA nomination review

[edit]

I would do a “To do” list but I’ve done more of a review style with explanations of why I’m suggesting what I suggest – making it a “To do“ list makes it seem like I’ve got all the answers when in fact I’m just throwing out suggestions for improvement. If you agree to some of these points by all means put together a “To do” list from it. I’m just trying to provide constructive, neutral feedback here.

  • Expand the lead a bit, it’s very short for a pretty long article. His indie days could be covered a bit better including his debut date and names of some of the most notable federations he worked for outside the WWE
  • I disagree and WP:Lead disagrees as well, even if the length isn't an issue the overall content of the lead should be improved greatly. I respectfully remove the crossed out tag because the lead must be improved before this can pass "Good Article" review, no two ways about it. MPJ-DK (talk) 18:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, no problem. Thank you for correcting that! iMatthew 2008 18:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • His pre-wrestling life should not be under the heading “early career” – it’s important to indicate that this isn’t about Brian Kendrick the wrestler, but Brian Kendrick the person (meaning that ALL aspects are covered not just wrestling)
  • Can we please call it “wrestling career” as a header? Goes along with the thinking that this is a Wikipedia article not a wrestling article IMO, this annoys me in SO MANY wrestling articles and well it’s my feedback so I’m mentioning it ;)
  • “In Universe” – this article has quite a few problems with that IMO, presenting wrestling as 100% real. There are several GA & FA articles out there that will give you a guideline on how to walk the fine line of saying “Hey we know this is pre-determined” without ruining the flow of the article. I got commended several times on the Bobby Eaton article and how it was handled there.
  • The name of the article is Brian Kendrick, it’s his real name and the name he’s used in the WWE. Can we please consistently refer to him as “Brian Kendrick” or ”Kendrick”? it’s cool to say that “He used the name Spanky” etc. but a line like “in February 2000, Spanky signed” – no he didn’t, the character didn’t sign a contract Kendrick (the real person) did. See what I’m saying?
  • Pre first WWE run is very short, falling into the trap of most articles of giving the WWE stuff 90% of the focus and almost glossing over what he did before. I’d like to see this section expanded – it’s one of the GA guidelines to “cover all aspects” which isn’t just his non-wrestling details but also his non-WWE details.
  • The header “World Wrestling Entertainment (2005–Current; Second run)” – should just be (2005-Current) and leave out the “second run”, people are smart enough to figure that out and it leaves the headline less cluttered.
  • World Wrestling Entertainment isn’t linked first time it’s mentioned in the main text. I know it’s in the header – but when something is mentioned for the first time in the main body it should be linked, regardless of what’s in the header.
  • Dates without years – this is Wikipedia and thus very likely that it’ll be here in 2009-10 etc. so a date like “February 19” by itself isn’t good (the Feb 19 example isn’t even from 2008 it’s from his second independent circuit section) – all dates should have years with them to make them “future safe”
  • A way to give a bit more detail on his title wins is to list who/they won it from, when he/they lost it agan and perhaps even to who (the first two is in my opinion a must, the last is optional) bring out the FACTS of his career more you know?
  • Alright well when you say "Kendrick won X title" why not say "on "January X Kendrick won X title from "Some guy" and held it until October XX" (or expand it to "Until October XX where he lost it to "some other guy") not just "He won a title", expand it, make it factual - the dates are facts, who he won it from and lost it to are facts - all of which easily sourced etc. MPJ-DK (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • the second “Independent Circuit” needs expansion as well, I can see several things that could be added. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 00:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dates without years! I repeat it because it’s a huge problem
  • Also dates with years should have both the date & the year linked, I think I saw one or two places where it wasn’t.
  • It may just be me but during their “longest WWE Tag Team Championship run ever” we just get a couple of lines on the feud with James & Stevens and that’s it? I’m not big on details but is that ALL they did for all those months? (that’s sad then on the booking part)
  • The section on the Armageddon match it sounds like they had 2 matches – first with Regal & Taylor and then a 4 way ladder match, that’s not correct though.
  • The linking of first “Deuce ‘N’ Domino” and then “Deuce” ‘N’ “Domino” is just odd – just link to the team since all the stuff is about the tag team battles. If people want to know more on them individually they’ll just click the team name first.
  • MA pet peve of mine – Kayfabe, especially the way it’s used here (Kayfabe). My stand is simple – don’t use Kayfabe in any article you want to get to GA or FA, don’t use the word! It’s an insider wrestling slang term and it can easily be replaced with a word everyone knows like “storyline” or something to those effects. It makes the article more readable and non-wrestling fans don’t sit there going “what the heck is kayfabe?” – yes they can click the link and all but a “Good Article” has a minimum of wrestling slang in it.
  • Not a single word on the time from when they lost the World Tag Team titles until their match with Umaga? 6 months with nothing? Not even a note on how Kendrick usually worked on Heat and not Raw and that London was injured? Nothing?
  • I’d remove the Theme Music section, it’s just too “List crufty” in my view, that belongs on a wrestling website not here. It’s just not notable enough to even mention, much less to add to the already considerable list at the bottom of the page.
  • Masked personas. This list could easily be worked into prose form and put in the section of his first WWE run, as few lists as possible please.
    • I'm removing it altogether. They weren't really personas, so much as one time things. I think a mention in the prose that he dressed like hometown sports teams or whatever is enough to get the point across. Nikki311 15:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing on his personal life in general? He was born, he earned money to go to wrestling school and that’s it? The GA criteria “broad in its coverage” isn’t really met here.
  • Problem is, kendrick doesn't do a lot of interviews, so there is pretty much no information to be had on this kind of thing. I manged to find some info, but it barely makes a paragraph. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 03:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a lot of comments but there is a lot of good in here, it’s not unimaginable that this could be a “Good Article” (unlike the current state of 90% of the wrestling articles). Keep up the good work and if you have questions feel free to ask. MPJ-DK (talk) 13:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - everything is done, except the personal life info, and that's simply because I can't find any. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 03:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Change in demeanor

[edit]

Should this article include Kendrick's change in demeanor (from happy/goofballish character to serious/almost heelish/bitter character) over the past couple of months? While he's not actually a heel, this new attitude (if you want to call it that) is a change from the way his character was primarily portrayed in the company and it started well before London's return to active competition, if I'm not mistaking. 151.213.94.153 (talk) 23:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His persona did change, as part of the new heel turn. The new Kendrick is less popular with fans, he looks like Jacksons prison bitch, hence the nickname Spanky 80.229.169.189 (talk) 00:48, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you look at the date of his comment, it's from way back in April when Kendrick once left the ring while London was getting a beating. The announcers were putting it over as a turn too, but a couple of weeks later, he was back to the same face Kendrick as before. Perhaps it was the beginning of the The Brian Kendrick gimmick but for whatever reason they didn't flip the switch on it until later the same year? I guess we'll never know, but that's my guess. As for whether or not this semi-heel turn is notable for the article, I don't know. --Kaizer13 (talk) 06:46, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAN on hold

[edit]
  • "Kendrick has wrestled for numerous promotions in his career, winning tag team championships in most of these, as well as several singles titles" - sounds like he won singles titles in these promotions...is that right? I dunno, confusing
  • "in addition, Kendrick was the first ever NWA International Junior Heavyweight Champion." - in needs a capital I, and remove "ever"
  • "and he is the son of Barbara Kendrick" - rmv he
  • 2nd para of Early life section needs paste tense
  • "It was there that Kendrick was given the nickname Spanky" - how did he get that nickname?
      • I don't think that needs to be explain, because it is just a change in name, which wrestling promotions never explain or give reasons for. I don't believe there is a notable reaaon on how he got that name. iMatthew 2008 11:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • He was never actually given the nickname according to the sources that are there (I don't know why it said nickname, so I changed it). He just adopted it, but there's no reason given anywhere, and I don't believe he's ever given a reason. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 11:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "on September 22." - wlink dates
    • Check that everywhere, actually

Prose gets better later on...leave me a note when done. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 02:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This GAN has passed, and this is now a good article! If you found this review helpful, please consider helping out a fellow editor by reviewing another good article nomination. Help and advice on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles, and you can ask for the help of a GAN mentor, if you wish. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 02:13, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sliced Bread #2

[edit]

Jim Ross and Mick Foley said on the July 25 SmackDown that Kendrick's move is now called "The Kendrick". Steveweiser (talk) 23:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be listed as Sliced Bread #2/The Kendrick 82.3.126.153 (talk) 02:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stupid question here but... Is there such thing as a sliced bread #1? KP317 05:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't believe there is. When a move is listen in italics, it usually means that's the way it is called on screen, such as The Hell's Gate or Sweet Chin Music. The #2 comes in from the form the move makes.--Lord Dagon (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

[edit]

Should there be a picture of The Brian Kendrick with his new gimmick? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.26.98 (talk) 23:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone can get a non-copyrighted picture, definitely. WP should really have guys who take pictures for the site... --Kaizer13 (talk) 23:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moves

[edit]

Do you guys think you can find the correct name for that running back of the knee kick to the face he does to people? thanks. (I know it was a crappy description, now just deal with it haha lol) KP317 05:04, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Brian Kendrick

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Brian Kendrick's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "OWOW":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kendrick

[edit]

I could have sworn I remembered at some point him being referred to as simply "Kendrick", must like Frankie Kazarian has just been referred to as Kazarian. Does this ring a bell with anyone else? It seems odd to me he has no nick names listed, I remember during his hippy reinvention period they must have called him some odd things. AweCo (talk) 16:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Brian Kendrick. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 06:17, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Brian Kendrick. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 13:44, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Brian Kendrick. 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) 12:48, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Brian Kendrick. 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) 05:32, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brian Kendrick. 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) 10:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brian_Kendrick&oldid=1207946996"