Jump to content

Talk:Kane (wrestler)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Untitled

Does anyone know the name of his Restaurant in Knoxville? My family is going to be passing through in June and I would love to take my kids there for dinner!

leah@tuckerconcrete.com

Other Places with Madrid in name

I'm not entirely sure but I do believe that the following format is what should be used; I have to find my stylebooks to be sure.

Listing Madrid as Madrid, Spain should be used to clarify that the capital of Spain is being referred to. The first time a place, such as a city or town, is listed in an article, or any other text, both the name of the city/town and the state/country or their equivalents should be present. Subsequent use of the place in the main body of the article the shortened form may be used.

The main body does not include: tables, charts, graphs, et cetera. For they are not part of the normal flow of the text. Furthermore, they are usually looked at separately from the article.

~Chrismhen (chrismhen@myway.com)

P.S. (I almost forgot this) There is a place called New Madrid, Missori; and a New Madrid County.

Timeline is a bit skewed.

The way this is written, at least in the beginning, can cause confusion as to when events occured. I'm thinking about making a timeline. --Chrissy 01:15, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Glen Jacob's Height

Is his actual height 7 foot as billed? As I have read that he wears risers in his shoes to boost him above the height of the Undertaker, though I am not sure if this is true. -User:mysterious_w

When he is wrestling on tv, he is 7'0" with his 3" padded size 16 boots on. He is really 6'9" without them. If you compare him next the the Big Show who is a legitimate 7'0", you can tell he is not nearly as tall!

Big Show is actually 7'2". --Chrissy 14:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

The Big Show said in 2001 that he was 7'1". He is now around the 7-foot mark and weighs 507 lbs. He was billed as 7'2", but that has never been his proven height.

--63.224.226.148 03:20, 18 February 2006 (UTC) Paul Wight is 7 ft 2 in his shoes, and about 7ft barefoot. Jacobs is a about 3 inches shorter than Wight (Show), so it seems pretty evident Jacobs is around 6'9.

Journey into Darkness section

Hm... the section on Journey into Darkness needs some clean up for structure and tone (it sounds like it has too much original thought there). Maybe we could give it its own article? --Jtalledo (talk) 17:16, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

For some reason this wiered text shows up next to his title reigns section at the bottom. Can anyone fix this?

Others

Who removed the 2 Kane (Masked) photos I added? And why!?

probably they were unlicenced Koberulz 14:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


Both Rey Mysterio's Wiki Page and WWE.com claim that Mysterio has the longest time in the Royal Rumble at 62:15. WWF Magazine (April 2001) says Kane lasted 58 minutes. Can anyone confirm this? --Jake Wilhite 17:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, nevermind, I just saw the Royal Rumble Wiki page. --Jake Wilhite 16:00, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Kane/Cain

The name Kane is a biblical reference to Cain, who killed his brother Abel when God accepted Abel's gifts and not his own.

Any truth to that? I assumed it was reference to the Undertaker, who at one time was called Cain/Kane the Undertaker...? --Jake Wilhite 14:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
They dropped the 'Kane' bit from Undertaker and reused it for Kane, does seem apporiate though cause it does link nicely with the biblical Cain/Kane cause he's attacked Taker numerous times. Night Bringer 12:33, 3 June 2006 (GMT +10)

I have always thought there was some link between the biblical mentioning of Cain and his jelousy towards his brother. I thought the jelousy would have been that Kane was jelouse of Undertaker for escaping the 'Fire' unhamred. I think the attacks on The Undertaker back this up, especialy since Two of the attack have been costing The Undertaker Buried Alive matches

Another nickname they use for him is The Big Red Machine


Both true and sort of untrue. The name Cain does come from the Bible and this was the original reason it was chosen. The spelling is actually credited and used from the movie Highlander III starring Christopher Lambert. Actor Mario Van Peebles played a swordsman known as Kane (not the spelling), and he moved around a little bit like the wrestler does now, and he too was supposed to be unstoppable. That is how Kane's name was officially born.--Charles-Joseph 03:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Source?--Dave. 09:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

2002 Injury

Does anyone remember what injury Glen suffered in 2002? And did it occur before or after Kane's beatdown and unmasking by the nWo? --Jake Wilhite 16:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It was a torn bicep, and it was after the unmasking. [1] McPhail McPhail 16:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

No it wanst, the torn bicep was before he got unmasked, thats why he returned in the new outfit with red stripes.

No, his unmasking by the nWo. Not his eventual permanent unmasking. --Jake Wilhite 15:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

OH OK.

A little research on this points down the EXACT date that Kane tore his bicep in 2002. His injury happened AFTER the storyline of the nWo beatdown. The nWo beatdown occured on April 8, 2002 on Raw. Jim Ross' Weekly Report was printed on April 19th 2002 about Kane and his bicep injury. He stated it occured last Sunday while training in Abilene, Texas. WWE House show results will confirm that Kane was in action on Saturday April 13, 2002 in Odessa, Texas, but the results for the Sunday April 14, 2002 show states the following; X-Pac came out and then Howard Finkel announced that Kane missed his flight and so X-Pac made a challenge to the back and Big Show answered the challenge. So Glen's injury to his bicep could be confirmed to have happened on Sunday, April 14th 2002. Bgredmchn 16:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

The 2002 injury was said to be suffered when Kane was assaulted back stage by the nWo during their rivalry. In reality it was suffered during a work out.

Height

well when the fake kane(freakin deacon) came the were the same height and the fake kane is 6'7

The fake Kane was clearly shorter than Kane even with obviously bigger lifts. Manssiere 14:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Kane is more like 6 foot 9. On WWE when Kane entered it said Kane is just under 7 foot. WWE exaggerates heights, Glen wore 3inch lifts to make him appear slightly taller than the (billed) 6'10 and a half Undie. Even in lifts he was nowhere near 7ft. Glen is not the same height as K Nash.(Halbared 11:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC))

Kane is 6'9" with his wrestling boots on. Without them he's probably around 6'8".

Back when he was Isaac Yankem, I remember him being shorter than the Undertaker, but when he debuted as Kane, he was taller (using lifts as Halbared said). I was under the impression that Taker was a legit 6'10, though his bio on here says different. Anyway, basically Kane's legit height is about an inch or so less than Taker's legit height. --JFred 02:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I would agree, and if you take Undie as being 6'8" (I think Undie is not this tall), then Glen is prolly 6'7"(Halbared 11:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC))

Glen Jacobs is a legit 6'6. He wears lifts still, but not sure if they are the big lifts he used to wear in his early days. Not sure what his weight is, but I doubt he is over 300lbs. Looks more like 280 to me. He has lost some size over the years. Powerslam magazine is the source for the height.

If I hear the word legit one more time im gunna bust a nut

Glen Jacobs is 6'8.25" in bare feet, ~6'9" in regular shoes and 6'9.5" in current ring gear. In his original lifts he was well over 6'10". Kevin Nash is only 6'9" in bare feet. Manssiere 14:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
If what you say is true aboot Nash, then that makes the Taker around 6 ft 7, since there was around 2inch diff between them at WM13.(Halbared 15:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC))
Taker is 6' 7-1/2" in bare feet. He looked more 1-1/2" shorter than Nash than a full 2" IMO. Manssiere 15:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

HE CANT BE 6'6", HE HAS BEEN IN THE RING WITH THE LIKES OF THE ROCK AND TRIPLE H WHO ARE BOTH IN THE 6'4"-6'5" AREA> HE HIS MUCH MORE THAN AN INCH OR TWO TALLER THAN THE BOTH OF THEM.

Both those chaps are shorter than that. See here. www.celebheights.com (Halbared 19:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC))

I agree, most of the heights of Wrestlers listed on WWE profiles, include the wrestler in his shoes(1.5-2 inches of shoe heels).

Glen Jacob's 6ft 9 translates to a 6ft7-8 without shoes. This also applies well with the Big show's 7ft translating to 6'10-11 without shoes. And it is known that Big show is 3-4 inches taller than jacobs. --207.225.65.89 01:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Why is kane at 6,7? Undertaker is at 6'8. Kane is 6,9. Kane is taller than the Undertaker.

Glen is not taller than the Taker, he is shorter, remember Issac Yankem?(Halbared 08:17, 28 May 2006

Yankem looked ~1" taller than Taker in that match. There is a picture of a face off between the masked Undertaker and Yankem, Judging by facial features and shoulder heights Yankem looks almost exactly 3/4" taller than Undertaker. During the match you can also see Yankem has no lifts. Manssiere 15:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

That bicep injury must still be bothering Glen, his size is definatly suffering. Look at it from today's back when he unmasked. Doesnt even look like the same man. He must not be able to hit the gym anymore.

Steroid ban is no doubt also hitting 95% of the wrestlers.(Halbared 16:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC))

I would think they could get them...just look at Vince ..he is swole up ...60 yrs old? he must be on something. I dont take the anabolics..but did get plenty of M1T, and Haladrol before they were banned. They work...but not as well as the good stuff. He may just be tired of all the working out also...its not easy to keep a physique like that.

Vince doesn't compete though, and he sure wouldn't take the pee test!:oD(Halbared 06:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC))

Credit: WIVK Radio, Knoxville Tenn. 2003 - Kane speaks on the Andy and Alison show;

Alison: "You're a big guy, how tall are you?"

Kane: "I'm about 6 foot 9."

Possibly, since this IS a discussion page, should we add a REAL height AND what he is billed at?Bgredmchn 14:05, 6 June 2006

Nah, because then it would be needed for a lot of other wrestlers. And he might have been in kafabe when he answerd that question.(Halbared 21:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC))

He was speaking out of character the entire interview speaking about how random some matches for Raw are, about him doing Pilates, and how it was being away from wrestling and home during his bicep injury. Bgredmchn 00:40, 7 June 2006

I think that Glen is a staggering 6'10. Look at how tall he looks compared to Show, he's only about an inch away from being Show's height & probably wears lifts in his shoes to make him 6'11. Son of Kong.

Yep, Kane is 7'0, or is 6'11 & some inches. Either way, just leave his height at 7'0 Son of Kong

Well, Kane isn't a legit 7'. (Even Shaq on rare occasions has admitted to only 6' 11-1/2" when he graduated college, though he must have grown almost an inch since) In the old days in his massive lifts Kane was approaching 6'11" however. Kane (or rather Jacobs) on the street, out of character consistently says "about six nine" when asked about his height, he has admitted to being 6' 8-1/4" in bare feet and 6'9" in shoes which is spot on based on photographs with people who we can get confirmed heights on.
Based on various sources, photographs, interviews, etc. here is my take on the much disputed "true" (bare feet measurments) heights of some of the wrestlers.
  • Giant Gonzales - 7'6"
  • Great Khali/Singh - 7'2"
  • Big Show/Wight - 6'11.5" (7'0" peak)
  • Andre - 6'11" peak (6'9 3/4" in the "twilight days")
  • Kevin Nash - 6'9.5"
  • Kane/Jacobs - 6' 8"
  • Giant Haystacks - 6'6.5"
  • Undertaker/Calaway - 6'7.5"
  • Big John Studd - 6'6"
  • Sid Eudy - 6'7"
  • Snitsky - 6'4"
  • Hogan - 6'5" (6' 3" currently)
  • The Rock/Johnson - 6'3"

Manssiere 15:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone just changed the height to 6"10 and added 3 pounds to his weight.Cosmic Larva 17:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Manssiere, that list is just about all wrong. Khali is a legit 7'3, the Undertaker is a legit 6'8 and Big John Stud is a legit 6'8 or 6'9 as he was only two inches shorter than Andre. Your list is almost completely wrong. This is how it should be:

  • Giant Gonzales - 7'6
  • The Great Khali - 7'3
  • The Big Show - 7'0
  • Andre the Giant - 6'10
  • Kevin Nash - 6'10 1/2
  • Kane - 6'9
  • Giant Haystacks (not sure about him, don't know much about him)
  • The Undertaker - 6'8
  • Big John Stud - 6'8 1/2 - 6'9
  • Snitsky - 6'4-6'7
  • Hulk Hogan - 6'4
  • The Rock - 6'5

Son of Kong

Son of Kong, I've seen some of your comments on these boards and your estimates are usually pretty far off. Laughably off at times, case in point, "I think that Glen is a staggering 6'10. Look at how tall he looks compared to Show, he's only about an inch away from being Show's height & probably wears lifts in his shoes to make him 6'11. Son of Kong and don't forget this little gem "Yep, Kane is 7'0, or is 6'11 & some inches. Either way, just leave his height at 7'0 Son of Kong". You place alot of emphasis on KAYFABE which is a major mistake. WWE generally adds 2" to the legit heights of wrestlers at or below the 6'4" range, and sometimes more for the bigger guys where it will be harder to guesstimate. There are a few exceptions, but that is the general rule of thumb.
The Great Khali is not a legit 7'3" (barefoot), his face off with Big Show proves that. Either Big Show is taller than the 7' barefoot he claims (not a chance) or Khali is shorter than his 7'3" claim, you can't have it both ways. Why don't you visit www.celebheights.com and see just how off some of your estimates are.

The Great Khali is a legit 7'3. Big Show is 7'0 barefoot. However, don't forget he wears boots. Big Show wears lifts in his boots that make him 7'2. Khali had Show by an inch at least which makes perfect sense.

The fact that you think the Rock is a legit 6'5" is further reinforcement of my belief that you don't know what you are talking about. Watch Be Cool sometime, in it the Rock can be seen being clearly shorter than 6'5" Vince Vaughn. The Rock has freely admitted that 6'5" Vince Vaughn is taller than he is. The Rock is 6'3" - 6'3.5", no more, we even have the Rock on record admitting as much.
Also, you think Snitsky is a legit 6'7"? Think again, here is a link to some photos of Ben Rothlesberger (6'5" legit) and Max Starks (just under 6'8" legit) with various WWE superstars. http://benroethlisberger.typepad.com/photos/big_ben_at_wwe/pictures_051.html Notice Kane has 3" on Rothlesberger but Snitsky appears almost exactly the same height as Rothlesberger and Snitsky is clearly shorter than Starks.
As for Big John Studd, one only needs to look at his matches with Hulk Hogan to see how wrong you are there.
Just curious, how tall do you think Triple H is? This one should be good for a quick laugh. Manssiere 16:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't put emphasis on kayfabe. And if you would look at some of my recent replies, you'd see that I said Kane is at least 6'7. And I never said Snitsky was a legit 6'7, I put it from being anywhere from 6'4-6'7, read it again. I don't even care about Snitsy anyway. As for Khali, he is 7'3, if he wasn't, I believe it would've been stated by now. As for the Rock, maybe I was wrong but how can I not know what I'm talking about because of my OPINIONS? That shows that you're not that bright to say I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm stating my opinions. Yes I know about lifts but that doesn't mean that everyone wears them. Lastly, Triple H has to be 6'2 or 6'3, he's not that short because he wasn't far from being as tall as Batista who's a legit 6'5. But enough about their heights, why do you care so much? You get laughs out of people making estimates, shows how much of a life you have....Son of Kong

First off, you went back and changed your Snitsky estimate, it's right there in the Wikipedia history. Click on the Glen Jacobs discussion page history, look at the last edit by Son of Kong and it's clear for all to see; you changed your Snitsky estimate because photograhic evidence proved you wrong. I can also show you photographic evidence that proves the Great Khali has nowhere near 3 inches on the Big Show, 1 inch, maybe 1.5 inches MAX. Since Paul Wight admits to standing only 7 feet barefoot (I think he is about 1/2" shy of that curently) then Khali CANNOT stand a true 7'3". The fact that you are nearly 2 inches off in your estimation of the Rock after telling me my list was completely wrong is further reinforcement of your ignorance. Batista is not a legit 6'5", once again you are buying into Kayfabe. Surprisingly, your estimate of Triple was fairly close, the guy is about 6'1.5" in reality. Lastly, your ability to predict anything about about me or my life based on this conversation has sadly proven just as inaccurate as your ability to judge heights. Manssiere 21:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

bottom line....6'10 without boots,6'11 with boots.

True. Iam 6ft 6in without shoes and when I met glen a year ago when he was wearing no platform shoes he was a least 3 in taller then me.

kane is 6 foot 9, undertaker is also 6 foot 9, the reason yankeem was smaller was becoz they billed him at 6 foot 7, so they had to make him appear smaller but couldnt help his length, taker is a legit 6'9, kane is around 6'9-6'9.5, kevin nash is 6'10, he lost height due to age and being taller than 6'2, andre the giant was 7'2-7'3 and great khali is 7'2 not 7'3, bigshow is 7'1

Yankem wasn't smaller than Taker, he was marginally taller. -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcITdwVdBIA -- Yankem was also billed at 6-9, never at 6-7. Glen Jacobs in reality is in the 6-8 range and appears to have about a .5" advantage over Taker/Calaway. Andre the Giant was never over 7 ft., Big Show isn't over 7 ft - he has stated this himself - and the great Khali has no more than a one inch advantage over Show meaning he can't be over a legit 7-1. Manssiere 14:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


glen jacobs has stated he is 6'8 an a half. on a profile of UT, it says wen he first started wrestling he was 6'9(24yrs) but wen he joined wwe he had lost sum height. since 1990 his real height has always been 6'8 an he never wore lifts until the ministry days but then in his biker days he wore shoes agen. today he is wearing lifts agen b/c the otha wrestlers r aswell. bigshow has said he is 7'1, an khali is sed to be 7'2, as tall as giant silva.

I can buy 6-8.5 for Jacobs, he is in that range, though I think that is on the liberal side. Taker has claimed he used to be 6-10 but got dropped on his head too much and now he is 6-9. I think that's just the typical example of a guy giving his in-shoe height, or being liberal by an inch. I don't believe Taker was ever over a legit 6-8, I also don't think he has lost over an inch of height. Big Show has said he is 7-1, "7-foot and a half inch, 7-1 is easier to say", and "7-0 in my socks", what are we going to believe? I tend to think the lowest number is the most realisitic. Not even Shaq is a legit 7-0, he's admitted to being 6-11.5". I updated my height listing above to reflect my current opinions based on loads of new evidence I have seen recently. Manssiere 16:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Glen Jacobs/Kane: Billed as 7'. Debut height, old costume, full mask, lifts etc. he was roughly 6'10 - 6'11. Look at Royal Rumble 1999 or 2000 i think, Kane has a staredown with The Big Show (7' barefoot). After his bicep injury and return with new mask and costume he didn't wear lifts he just his usual boots, this applies to now 2007, he is 6'9 - 6'10 in gear. I'd say 6'9.5 in gear. GLEN JACOBS IS 6'8.5 BAREFOOT. He has stated this HIMSELF on numerous occassions (interviews and people asking). The match with Isaac Yankem vs. The Undertaker in 1996 they had a staredown, Glen was taller it's hard to use heads because Glen's got boofy hair, just look at shoulders, chin, nose, etc. Isaac Yankem DID NOT use lifts! If anyone was using lifts in the match it would've been Undertaker. There was no reason for Yankem to use lifts because he was jobber and the WWE would be trying to put Taker over as the big, bad, dominating, phenom, etc. Glen Jacobs = 6'8.5 barefoot. In gear(currently) = 6'9.5. In gear(1997 - 2002) = 6'10/6'11. btw I think Kevin Nash is 6'10 barefoot, Big Show 7', Nathan Jones 6'10, Undertaker 6'7.5(now), i could go on but i won't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.13.228 (talk) 06:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Tombstone Piledriver

Why doesn't Kane tombstone very much anymore?

Mainly because piledrivers are all but banned in the WWE now. Taker's is grandfathered in, as it's been his finisher since his appearance (except for a time in his biker gimmick when he used The Last Ride). Kane, however, used the Chokeslam for his finisher for the most part, and therefore was not grandfathered in. -Darryl Hamlin 20:54, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
It actually has more to do with damage to his knees, a problem Taker has had as well. He stopped using it regularly long before piledrivers were outright banned. Tromboneguy0186 03:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Kane did actually tombstone Rob Conway after he wore the May 19 shirt.

Kane tombstones once in a while. He tombstoned the priest at Edge and Lita's wedding.

I removed the entry about Kane using the Tombstone again. He has always used it from time to time. I felt it wasn't worth mentioning. --Jake Wilhite 13:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

If piledrivers are banned how come Taker and Kane can still use the Tombstone? Night Bringer

Because they are banned for everyone except Kane and Undertaker. The tombstone piledriver has been used by Kane and Undertaker almost all there career and to it would be a shame to not be able to use it anymore.

Same reason Jerry Lawler still uses the piledriver when he, on ocassion, wrestles for WWE. Tromboneguy0186 13:14, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, people like them who used the Piledriver for years have allowances made for them since they are far less likely to mess up than someone else. Hybrid 05:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The tombstone Pile Driver ban was put into effect becasue of Stone Cold Steve Austins neck injury suffered while being piledriven. The WWE has outlawed it to all superstars that are inexpirienced in using the move where as The Undertaker and Kane can execute the move perfectly. They offer advanced training in judging the distance between the head and ring canvas to highly tallented superstars that would feel comfortable using the move without performing it wrong.

also because Kane blew out one of his knees while he played basketball and doesn't do it often because of bad knees -kanenite10

Tombstone Piledrivers were only banned for Stone Cold matches, or any piledriver move for that matter. The real reason why they stopped doing it is becuase of the impact on the knees. I've done Kane's Tombstone quite a few times which does hurt your knees after a while of doing it. You will notice that when Kane does his Tombstone now, just like Taker, he just falls to knees besides dropping in a spiked motion.--Charles-Joseph 05:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Weight

Is it true that Kane is 326 pounds?

I doubt he is that heavy, looks more like 290 to me.(Halbared 11:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC))

I agree, that is basically his gimmick weight. --JFred 02:06, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Kane weighs more than the Undertaker doesn't he? ring announcers bill him as 320 pounds now

I would prolly think so, he looks more muscular.(Halbared 08:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC))

SmackDown! bills him at 323 lbs.

Kane is about 275-280 pounds, as quoted from Jim Ross' Weekly Column at wwe.com (August 30, 2002). (bgredmchn 13:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC))

kane is freakin' 320 pounds,taker is 305-315.

Only in kayfabe. -- THL

Kane is 300lbs because of my experience of how he looks my brother is a professional strongman and weighs 330lbs at 6ft 9in and he looks smaller in size then Kane does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Switchat (talk • contribs)

I think Kane is around 300 lbs. legit. He has alot of Muscle mass and a bit of a gut, (takes nothing away from his strength or ability) i hope he gets the title again sometime. SU121188 03:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It is true that Kane is 320 to 325Lbs legit. He is definitely heavier than Undertaker due to his muscle mass. All of Kane's weight is from his muscle mass more than anything else. Unlike some other giant wrestlers like Big Show where it is mostly fat. Undertaker was one time 328Lbs and this is true and it shows at Armageddon 1999 shortly before leaving for his surgery. He was a little overweight then, but looking at him now you can tell he has lost a lot since then. As a wrestler you have to weight yourself regularly to get your correct weight to give to the announcer. It is true that some wreslters may, and I have done this, exaggarate their weight to add 10Lbs.--Charles-Joseph 05:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Unibomb/Unabomb

OWW says "Unibomb." Now, I'll admit that they do also refer to JBL's cabinet as "The Cabinit," so it's not as if Brad Dykens would win the Scripps Spelling Bee, but it's seems that there's a disagreement in sources. Tromboneguy0186 20:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's an authoritative source either way, unless it is covered in his book. McPhail 15:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
OWW is horrible if you want the correct spelling of something. And Kane's book, to my knowledge, is pure kayfabe. --Jake Wilhite 14:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Black Knight

Jacob's debut was as Issac Yankem. It was Jeff Gaylord who was the Black Knight. source, Powerslam. Correct. glen's deut was as Isaac Yankem when he got the DQ at survivor series

Fake Kane

on may 29tth, why did the old kane come out and chokeslam the current kane? What was it about? Whopper 01:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm gonna go out on a limb here, can we add a suggestion that it might be Undertaker? When you had the close ups of his chin it looked like taker, and it would explain the double sleaves ('Taker has TONNES of identifiable tatoos), he is shorter than Kane, the build is right and on alot of those May 19th things it sounds like 'Taker as well. Surely its about as likely as this Dorien DeVille bloke? Help plz 04:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
    • 151.213.106.208 13:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) PWInsider has stated that "Kane" is being played by the "Freakin' Deacon" Dorian Deville, if that helps any but then again, someone listed that the Wrestling Observer is listing Drew Hankinson as playing "Kane". Both pages for these wrestlers has them listed as playing "Kane," so who knows at this point.
Drew Hankinson = Dorian DeVille. I expanded the Hankinson page and made Dorian DeVille redirect there.Illuminattile 16:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Why doesnt wwe.com have any pictures or any videos of the fake kane thing? i really want to watch it its bugging me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU9ktupOXEI&search=Kane (must be logged in) --Jake Wilhite 19:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Well prior to last night the WWE official website did include a video footage of the new (or old) Kane, but later during the early hours it was removed. Probably the WWE wants to keep their fans a bit agitated. However I am realy looking forward to see how they are going to build this storyline, if any one got any suggestion please write down. --Jay2o 18:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I get the feeling this will lead to Kane "becoming" Glen Jacobs, slowly revealing he was never Kane to begin with. Possible just manipulated by Paul Bearer into believing he was. --Jake Wilhite 19:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it may be something simple like JBL messing with Kane to get back at Kane for chokslaming him on May 19th since JBL left Smackdown probaly to move to Raw and start a feud with Kane.

Alright, who made up that Drew Hankinson = Dorian DeVille crap. Thats not right, they aren't the same person. — Κaiba 18:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Wrong. [2], [3]. McPhail 19:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Never mind... — Κaiba 19:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Why the hell did someone remove the Kane & Fake Kane pic???? Its so confusing readers will need to see that picture. Whoever can, I suggest they put it back!!!

How do you change and add pictures?

Who took out about the The Doppelgänger simularities like the undertaker many years back. That's an interesting fact that should be placed back, two on screen brothers having look a likes that they've faced; or will at some point.

Personally I think this might be a man vs his 'inner demons' angle cause the voices have been playing havoc with Kane's head, this might be like the 'darker' part of Kane finally coming out again. It'll be interesting to see if the other Kane attacks the rest of the locker room or just Kane. Night Bringer 1 June 2006, 10:09 (GMT +10)

Someone's done it again! Why did someone take down the Kane-Fake Kane backstage pic? That was a real good pic? Why take it down? You didn't like it? I suggest that someone put it back up.

WWE has banned all pics/vids of fake Kane because it was ovious it was the same person as fake Undertaker... SKRIBUL 19:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
The only obvious thing here is that you do not know what you are talking about. The fake Undertaker was played by Brian Harris(Lee). He was the best man at Mark Callaway's wedding, and recently has had a short stint in TNA. 164.106.154.38 16:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)km

I love how you say it's obvious he doesn't know what he's talking about and then go on and make a statement that's just plain wrong. Fake Kane was Drew Hankinson AKA Freakin' Deacon AKA "Festus" of the new "Jesse and Festus" tag team. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.209.107.53 (talk) 06:26:45, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

Wrestling Attire

Can anyone tell me the different outfits Kane wore and when? I know he debuted with a "sweater" look with only a sleeve over the right arm and that was used to 2000. Then came the tanktop in 2001. When did the one with both sleeves come in? --Aaru Bui 07:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Kane wore both sleeves in the inferno match in his first year. It was also used by the Undertaker, when he pretended to be Kane later that year.(Halbared 08:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC))

Wrong, he did not use it for 2/3 inferno matches that im sure of, the first one vs taker and the third vs hhh -kanenite10

Kane also wore the double sleeves against stone cold in the first blood match, so it was not clear if he was bleeding on his arm. He only wore double sleeves from time to time, very few times actually.

The kane clone who attackes kane has a tatto on his arm i think witch is why he wore two sleeves

even then, the sleeves on the doppleganger doesn't have Kane's spikes coming down the side -kanenite10

The real Kane wore two sleeves at one point as well. Check out this pic to see: http://www.gerweck.net/drewhankinson.htm TJ Spyke 22:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)



I know it has been a while since this thread has been discussed, but to answer the original question of this thread I will list all the outfits Kane has wore. One interesting fact to begin with is that not only does Kane wear a right handed glove because his finisher is the chokeslam (done with the right hand), but when he was the Fake Diesel he wore a single right handed fingerless glove too which he current wears today. Below are all variations of his attire he has ever used when he wrestled as Kane:

  • Kane's debut outfit he had a full outfit in the color of red. He had black pleather flames down his right leg, and on the opposite side of his leg was a black pleather looking buckle like design. That design went all the way up his left side to where the sleeve began. His top outfit had no left arm sleeve, but he did wear a left studded wristband. His right arm was completely covered and he wore a right handed studded leather glove. On his top outfit he had black pleather flame like designs, they were short and only had three spiked points. The mask was red leather with black flame like spikes painted on it.
  • Kane's second attire was missed completely and not too many fans even noticed it was in fact not the one he debuted with. The second outfit was exactly like his original debut outfit. The only difference was on the pleather flame design. The flame like spikes were longer and a little skinnier than the originals and there was one added extra one.
  • The other Kane outfit was the infamous and only outfit that Kane had two sleeves covering both of his arms. It looked exactly like his first two in color. The tights had black pleather flames on both sides this time. The top had two sleeves covering his arm, and he still only wore one glove on his right hand. The mask was still the original mask he has worn ever since he debuted. His second mask made its appearance with his next outfit. One neat little thing about this outfit if you ever get a chance to see an up close view of the left shoulder, it is actually buttoned up. Originally this outfit was going to start off to be a one sleeved outfit, but was later given an extra sleeve which is buttoned onto the full outfit. The reason the Imposter Kane never wore this is because the top portion of the outfit had been sold for charity a while back and the owner did not want it to be used on TV.
  • Next was the newest redesign of his original outfit. Kane wore tights and had the black pleather flames on both sides of his tights. The top was similar to the original debut gear, only it was more elaborate in how it looked. On some of the pleather it was made so you could see through it to his skin underneath. The mask was similar only, where the longer black spike came down over the left eye to the bottom of the mask, a reversed red one went up the other side. It made the mask appear to have a half red and black look to it.
  • Next was considered by many Kane fans to be his most popular attire. It is exactly the same as the one before this one, except the colors were reversed. The mask's colors were reversed as well.
  • Next was the first time Kane wore a newer looking attire. This one was a black tanktop looking design. The main color was black, with more see through areas on his torso, back, and legs. On top of these also was an orange, and red-orange, and red fire like design. The mask worn here was black and the red flame like spikes were larger than usual. The first mask used for this outfit was made so it could be ripped apart during a match.
  • The next outfit looked similar to the one before it, only there was more see through areas than colored areas. His torso had less of the flame design, and more of the see through areas. The tights remained the same. The mask was black with the red spikes having more of a curve look to it.
  • His next outfit was only worn one night at Survivor Series where Team WWE VS Team Alliance. It was also a tanktop like design, only it was entirely red with no see through areas at all. The flames on the chest were solid black as was the design on the legs. The mask used here was still the black one. However, after this outfit, Kane chose to wore any different color variation of his mask while he continued to wear one of the other two tanktop looking outfits, until he debuted with his 2003 attire which is next. Every outfit from here to his debut attire, Kane had always worn a black studded belt.
  • Kane's 2003 attire was the first time his outfit sort of went through a drastic change. Kane wore a tanktop like design outfit. Half of it was see through, while the other half was solid. It was mostly black. On his torso was a design of red straps which looked as though they were holding him back (kind of like a mock of a straightjacket). He started wearing elbow pads by this time. On his left arm he still wore the studdes wristband, and on his left hand he wore a new fingerless right glove. An interesting fact here that not many people know is it is the same glove he wore when he was the Fake Diesel, he still wears it today. His mask went through the most change. It looked the same in shape except for the mouth area. This time the mouth area was left off, and the color was all black with a big red fire burn on the center of the mask. He work red kneepads with black design hanging from them. On his right leg were similar straps like on his torso. From here to his current attire, Kane's belt looks like it is held in place by red straps.
  • Kane's next outfit was also probably missed by his fans since it did look a lot like the one before it. The change was that it of course showed more of his skin.
  • The next outfit was the same as the 2003 attire, only this time, Kane was finally unmasked. This was the first unmasked attire Kane ever wore.
  • The next outfit was the same as the first unmasked attire, only he wore no top to it, just the tights. This would be the last attire Kane ever wears his left studded wristband.
  • Kane's next attire would be the current attire he currently wears. It is black tights with red barbed wire like design. Within the red barbed wire design is black pleather. His left studded wristband is gone and now he only wears black sports tape on his left wrist. There is a rumored new outfit in the works. Plese note the next outfit is only rumored to be in the works.
  • Note: This has not been confirmed in any way. It is only speculated. Kane is supposed to have a new attire by the end of the year. All it is, is a reversed look of his current attire. Red tights with black pleather barbed wire like design. The biggest part is he may debut with it at the next PPV, or on his ten year anniversary of October 7th, 2007. Until then we'll have to wait and see.--Charles-Joseph 03:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Retirement Impending?

sources have claimed, kane will retire in januaray 2007, any truth to it, and should it be put on the article?

It's still a rumour at this point, so no. If he retires in 2007, it can be added to the article then. McPhail 22:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with that. Unless the sources can ever (and they can't because of legal issues) get Glen Jacobs to be "quoted" as saying such, and NOT from "someone" with in the WWE saying (and they never mention who it is) it should be left off of here. This shouldn't be a wrestling rumor site, let's leave that to those that run those sites. bgredmchn 03:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

There have been many rumors about Kane wanting to retire for basic reasons of wrestlers such as himself not getting the right treatment by the company. According to rumors and some people behind the cameras in the WWE, Kane was unhappy with the direction of his character as done by the writers. It wasn't too much about getting a title, but that too was placed into the argument and of those couple of reasons he threatened to walk. Upon this getting back to the writers and head of the WWE who we know who it is, there was an actual meeting with Kane at WWE Headquarters. Discussions were made and if by Jan 2007 if he is unhappy with the current direction his character was going he could walk and it would be Undertaker who would end the Kane saga. That is the reason for the move to Smackdown. There is a small tie in with the "Imposter Kane" to this as well. WWE had brought in Drew Hankinson who is also known as the "Freakin' Deacan" to portray Kane because they both actually perform the Chokeslam as a finisher. They do look a little similar as well. When the Imposter Kane defeated Kane that was the actual day that Kane had threatened to walk. Imposter Kane was brought in for this purpose as well. He would have been the one to replace the current Kane much like Brian Lee did for the Undertaker. Kane's contract does expire toward the end of Jan 2007 and he has not made any descisions on his current identity as Kane. --Charles-Joseph 19:40, 9 November 2006

rubbish kane would not retire in jan 2007 its nearly 2008

This monday night on raw, there will be a loser leaves raw match between umaga and kane. Kane is rumored to retire in january so i think its only logical that kane will lose, move to smackdown and undertaker and kane will have a short stint till january where they face off in the royal rumble in a match where the loser leaves wwe, an 'i quit' match sounds fitting 87.114.13.53 09:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

((Note: And verify this for yourself - it appears the current wrestler who acts as Kane is NOT the original Kane, which was played by Glenn Jacobs, aka Kevin Nash. Look at photographs of the two wrestlers, and compare them. They are NOT the same people.))

What are you talking about. Glen Jacobs and Kevin Nash (who works for TNA now, btw) are two different people entirely. The guy playing Kane now is the same one its always been - Glen Jacobs. Bmg916 Speak to Me 18:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no move, lack of consensus. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 19:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Discussion

Add any additional comments

I oppose the move to "Kane (wrestler)" - although he's primarily known by that name and has used the name in See No Evil, the film is a WWE film and Jacobs likely isn't able to use the name outside of WWE. But the main thing is that most wrestlers are listed under their real names and using "Glen Jacobs" is best for disambiguation purposes, since Kane has other meanings on Wikipedia. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Isn't that precisely what "(wrestler)" is for? By your logic, Sting (wrestler) should be at Steve Borden since Sting has other meanings (which I actually proposed and got vehemently shot down, hence this and other similar proposals) Tromboneguy0186 08:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Lid: I understand that, but aside from Freakin' Deacon, are any of them logical searches nowadays? Are people going to input "Kane" when looking for Lane Huffman (another possible move) or Mark Calaway? Drew Hankinson I'll grant you, but that can easily be accomodated by:
For the wrestler briefly known as "Impostor Kane," see Drew Hankinson

Tromboneguy0186 08:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Sting is a different case. He's used the Sting name not only for a long time, but across promotions. Kane likely doesn't have that right. Even if people type in "Kane" they'll still get the disambiguation page. Let's leave the page where it is. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Tromboneguy0186: You're right; Sting should be indexed at "Steve Borden" not "Sting." He doesn't even use the Sting name outside of wrestling. His movie credits are nearly always as "Steve Borden", with the occasional early role being credited as "Steve 'Sting' Borden." Sorry I missed the debate on that one; I would've supported you. ;) Tuckdogg 14:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

What kind of majority is needed to move or keepm something?(Halbared 14:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC))

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

where is kanes finishers and signature moves?


Wife & Children

Jacob's wife is named Tia, not Maurisa & he has one son with her. Son of Kong


The rumour of Jacob's wife being named "Tia" and of him having one "son" is false. This internet rumour was perpetuated by some over-the-top fangirl. However, Jacobs was confirmed to have two stepdaughters with his wife Maurisa, in the first interview he gave in 1999, with Terry Morrow of the Knoxville News-Sentinel. As far as I am aware from other more recent articles,the two are still married, or at least we have been given no realiable evidence that they are not. Kalfu

Sick Entry

Somebody put an entry in there saying that Kane died on the 23rd August. Is there any truth to this or is he just injured.If it was fake I sure hope that guy nearly sparked a chain reaction that would involve wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.111.61.87 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 23 August 2006.

I think I got the last of that. Ken S. 21:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Undertaker's page was also vandalised. Cosmic Larva 03:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

It is untrue. Kane is still alive and well. That entry may have come from the untrue rumors that the current Kane is not the origional and that the origional Kane retired due to the WWE officials atempting to make him remove his mask.

Outfit/Disguise Pictures?

I know I'm old school, but when I watched wrestling, Kane still wrestled in disguise, and I thought it was for a pretty significant part of his career, yet there aren't any pictures of this ... Topher0128 04:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Relationship Status????

Just yesterday Kane was listed as havign a wife and two kids, now it claims he's single and the mention of the children is gone. Did something happen or was this vandalism??

EDIT - Oops, forgot to sign this. Cosmic Larva 03:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

It will just be vandalism as Kane is married with two step-daugeters

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kane_(wrestler)/Archive_1&oldid=1089778354"