Talk:List of WWE personnel/Archive 15

This is an archive of past discussions about List of WWE personnel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

→

Conditions for unprotecting this article

I'm willing to consider unprotecting this article if the contributors are willing to agree about what sources will be used to substantiate whether someone is to be listed in the "Unassigned talent" section, or anywhere else in the article. First, I'd like to remind everyone of Wikipedia:Reliable sources, and also point out that Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Style guide#Sources has a list of sources and web sites that have proven reliable for professional wrestling.

Here are the main issues I see:

Editors are not willing to agree on which sources are reliable.
Editors haven't always been providing references to back up their additions to or removals from the list. Since this stuff is becoming contentious, we need references. (See Wikipedia:Citing sources.)
The editing has become inflammatory, with accusations flying back and forth.

In fact, I'm wondering if it's even possible to prove that someone has been hired by the WWE if they haven't appeared on-air yet.

I'd like to get agreement on whether the following wrestlers should appear in the list of unassigned talent, as well as consensus on the sources:

Byron Wilcott
David Otunga
Dos Caras, Jr.
Jason Riggs and Johnny Riggs
Glamarella
Matt Walsh
Mike Hutter
Chad Lail

I have no opinion and no knowledge about whether these wrestlers are WWE employees or not, and I haven't done any research. That's for you guys to determine. (Also, I may be mixing real names and screen names here. I don't know the difference -- I'm more proficient in architecture, like the difference between Richardsonian Romanesque architecture and Beaux-Arts architecture.) --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 04:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I think any talent that pwinsider.com announces (i know its not a rs, but they are about the only reliable site when it comes to hiring/firing of talent/employees), should be allowed. In the "Unassigned" section, if a rs is not given, then the non rs should be listed, with the text of "Unconfirmed" next to the individual's name.--NickSparrow (talk) 05:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I say use the links I provided above for the people in question. Mike Hutter, David Otunga, and Phil Shatter (Chad Lail)'s links meet the WP:PW specifications. The others (Byron Wilcott, Jason and Johnny Riggs, and Matt Walsh) don't. Why don't we keep a section on this talk page that keeps track of them using "unacceptable" links, and when/if an acceptable one is found, they can then be added. According to [1], Dos Caras isn't coming afterall, so he can be canned completely. As for Glamarella, I have no real opinion. Dahumorist (talk) 05:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Really, there's no reason a continued discussion about questionably signed talents can't remain on this page for this very purpose. Dahumorist (talk) 05:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Here is a better source for the signing of Jason Riggs, Johnny Riggs, and Mike Hutter. http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/94207/WWE-News:-Stock-Price,-FCW,-Next-Austin-Movie,-More.htm

--NickSparrow (talk) 07:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The problem I found with that link is that they source PWinsider.com, and no matter how hard I search PWinsider, I couldn't find their post on the subject. :-\ Dahumorist (talk) 15:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I can't check these links at work due to policy, but if the 411mania link confirms it, I'm willing to accept that. Hazardous Matt 17:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The article needs to be unprotected because of the simple fact that there is some info that needs to be corrected and it can't because theres a protection on it. How can people keep the article up to date when theres a protection block on it? --Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

You would discuss the changes here, so an admin could make the necessary changes. Hazardous Matt 19:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

If anyone wants to make non-controversial changes to this article, make a new section on this talk page with {{editprotected}} at the top and details of exactly what change to make, and a sysop will come along and edit it. Stifle (talk) 09:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Unprotected

I've removed the protection from this article. It doesn't look like any of you have agreed on which sources are reliable, or whether any of these particular wrestlers indeed should be listed or not listed. In other words, I'm pretty sure you people will edit war over this article again. Besides, you're spending far more time debating my protection and people's block logs than discussing improvements to the article.

I suppose I was expecting too much for a group of professional wrestling fans to agree on how to edit an article. After reading this article and this article, I have more of an insight into the minds of today's 18- to 24-year olds. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 19:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

That wasn't very civil but thanks anyway! Kalajan€₣ 19:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

You don't have to be a major asshat just because you have more authority than us dude. If you have no respect for wrestling, stay the hell away and leave it to somebody else. Go and have some fun with your Euclidean geometry or something. Disrespect may or may not be intended. --Kaizer13 (talk) 20:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree (but without the swears) Kalajan€₣ 20:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

How dare you, Elkman. I'm here editing this page to make it as encyclopedic and factual as humanly possible. And I'm not the only one. And you lump us together like we're some group of degenerate little kids causing trouble. I take much offense to that. The small amount of power you've been given has gone to your head. You honestly owe myself and all these other people an apology. You'd think someone with authority on wikipedia would be caught up with the rules about Civility. Dahumorist (talk) 21:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

WHAT!

Why's it been protected again? Kalajan€₣ 21:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No ****ing way.

I told all of you to stay away from the page. Truco said to use warnings. I said to build a consensus. NONE of you listened. I don't get what is so hard? ¿Should I say it in Spanish, amigo? I am tired. I have no words. None. ₰imon^KSK 21:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I love this. It got protected again. I'm just going to laugh everytime now. Maybe it should stay protected forever. Because it seems none of us can quit warring.--WillC 21:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No but see, I edited about 2 times and it wasn't edit warring, just the essencial. Kalajan€₣ 21:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The funniest part was that it was not you, Kalajan. ₰imon^KSK 21:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't!?!? WOW. Kalajan€₣ 21:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

From this edit summary by Elkman, I must say he reads the future. Some of you need to get more aquainted with the Wikipedia policy of Reliable sources. Kalajan, no offense, but you need to learn how to edit Wikipedia more properly, I noticed many mistakes in your revisions, such as rewording statements into badly worded fragments and deleting wiki markup. Other users need to word their edit summaries better, because that is what admins look for in edit warring, which caused this bad-faith protection because it was the IPs who added incorrect information. In addition, use warnings on IPs, see WP:WARN. If that doesn't work, report them to WP:AIV if they vandalize excessively or if they revert more than 3 times. I will contest this protection, but request semi-protection, as long as users can handle not warring.--Tru co 21:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I say let the article stay protected. It is just going to start another edit war as soon as it is unprotected. As soon as the last one expired I saw about 15 edits in one minute (I might have exaggerated a bit). The warning users and ips will not stop the edit wars. When people learn to use the talk page before making big or controversial edits will it end.--WillC 21:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

CONSENSUS

This is nuts, let's show that we can work together here, people. SOME OF THIS IS A REPOST FROM ABOVE - I say use the links I provided above for the people in question. Mike Hutter, David Otunga, and Phil Shatter (Chad Lail)'s links meet the WP:PW specifications. Nick Sparrow posted a source for Jason and Johnny Riggs. The others (Byron Wilcott and Matt Walsh) still need to be discussed. Why don't we keep a section on this talk page that keeps track of them using "unacceptable" links, and when/if an acceptable one is found, they can then be added. According to [2], Dos Caras isn't coming afterall, so he can be canned completely. Agree or Disagree? I Support. Dahumorist (talk) 21:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

As for some other edits (Ortiz and Long being moved to Smackdown, and Vickie being deleted), that's just vandalism that needed to be reverted. Dahumorist (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Those were IP additions, without sources or unreliable sources, which leads to their removal. I have requested unprotection of the article, because there isn't an edit war here, its straight common sense per WP:RS.--Tru co 21:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Article probation?

I don't mind who comments here, but most admins will probably know what this is. This protection log makes for very bad reading. I remember several months ago similar thing happening on the Sarah Palin article. Shortly after, that was put on probation. I, looking at the above, am leaning towards a possible article probation towards this article due to the amount of edit warring that is taking place. For those unaware of article probation, please see Wikipedia:General sanctions#Sanctions placed by the Wikipedia community, and for an example of it in place, see Talk:Barack Obama/Article probation. D.M.N. (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

You know, I requested unprotection, but at the moment, this is the best thing to do. I ~~Support~~ article probation, until a consensus is reached about who should be included, what should not be included, what is a reliable source, what isn't a reliable source, etc. With the many chances this article has gotten to reach a consensus, users fail to produce one, and would rather fight about it. This is the best resort for now.--Tru co 21:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Support short-term probation on the article until primary disputes are resolved. Hazardous Matt 21:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Whoa Whoa Whoa. If you look above, I have set up a possible idea for consensus. I think at the very least, we should wait for some responses and see if this can be done before probation comes into play. Keep in mind, lots of things needed to be changed when this page became unprotected. Naturally, what comes along with that is the occasional vandalism that we see every so often anyway. I agree with Matt that the article should be protected until the disputes are resolved, however. Dahumorist (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Dahumorist, I agree that this can be settled but just agreeing on what sources are credible. The reason I'm avoiding that conversation is I primarily access WP from work, which has strong policies against casual browsing. I find the 411mania reference to be reasonably reliable as I've come to find them a trusted news source. Hazardous Matt 22:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I find them extremely reliable as well. Dahumorist (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

411mania is not reliable because they do not have an accurate fact checking system, there was a general discussion about this article in the past about is reliability on Wikipedia, and it was found not reliable. Yes, you propose a consensus, but this article needs a more in-depth consensus, like there was a couple months back.Tru co 22:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Fair nuff, if we're going strictly by the accepted WP:PW sources, which is fine by me, then Mike Hutter and David Otunga have reliable sources. The others don't, so, they should remain off the page until reliable sources are provided. Until then, we should keep a section on the talk page for discussions about questionable talent signings. Is that REALLY an unreasonable possible consenses? Thoughts? Comments? Dahumorist (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

See below for a general wide discussion.--Tru co 22:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Block

Why does everybody keep argueing over the page being protected and the page being blocked why don't the wikipedians block the users who are causing the vandilism instead of protecting the page and making people (Kalajan) mad. Benton Tigers 22:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

A million sections over this is unneeded, see above discussions as to the reasons.--Tru co 22:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

In case you've missed it, there are too many editors to block, and I have no confidence that blocking editors instead of protecting the page would help. Stifle (talk) 09:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

No Benton I'm not mad, don't worry, but my opinion here is that the page shouldn't be protected, only a user's right to edit disabled. Kalajan€₣ 14:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Vickie Guerrero and Jerry Lawler

In my oppinion the occasional wrestler status of Vickie Guerrero and Jerry Lawler should be removed. They have just 1-2 wrestling matches a year and therefore they are no real wrestlers. Vickie Guerrero is the manager of Team Lay-Cool and Lawler is a color commentator. I mean with Hornswoggle I understand that he is an occasional wrestler, but not with Vickie Guerrero and Lawler. --Hixteilchen (talk) 23:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

For me, I Support for Vickie, but I Oppose for Jerry Lawler. Jerry can still wrestle, but since he's semi-retired and currently color commentator of Raw, he can compete in 2 to 3 matches a year. Vickie on the other has now started using wrestling moves to help the girls in Team Lay-Cool. She spent most of 2008 and early 2009 as GM of both SD and Raw, most of it in a "kayfable" wheelchair. Vickie needs to be in the ring more to even be consider as a occasional wrestler.--Yugiohmike2001 (talk) 21:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Consensus discussion

I am intending this discussion to build a consensus among editors who edit this page. If, a consensus cannot be reached, and another edit war breaks out, probation will be sought. If I missed a subject, add it below the other ones. --Tru co 22:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Jeff Hardy

Jeff Hardys contract ran out on the 32st of July, it is not clear if Hardy has signed a new one or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.211.16.244 (talk) 04:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Signings/Releases

Unresolved

– Consensus needed. D.M.N. (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know the exact wrestlers that are being debated over signing with WWE, or being released, but the bottom line is: For signings, the only accepted reliable sources are statements made exactly by that wrestler (this can be sourced with whatever source as long as the source states "Christian Cage officially stated in an interview") or an announcement made by WWE. For releases, many can be sourced with WrestleView, WON, and PW Torch because these websites have inside information with WWE and they get the news edge on releases, but these are the only accepted sources for that (and by WWE and direct statements by that person). For FCW: they must appear on FCW, WWE/FCW must acknowledge their signing or appearance, blogs by WWE employees, and statements by that wrestler.--Tru co 22:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Support As long as we have a set standard on what makes a reliable source, I'm fine with it. Vjmlhds 22:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Sources deemed reliable Hazardous Matt 22:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

2. Oppose I hate to cause trouble here, but when it comes to developmental signings, WWE.com never does them. The only sources for them are sites like PW Torch, the newsletter, 411mania, PWInsider, Wrestleview, etc. Dahumorist (talk) 22:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, it depends where they get their information from. If it says "According to an inside reporter" then it will be okay, but if WrestleView says "According to PW Insider" (then you will have to find where the original information came from, it just cant be coming from website to website, it has to have an original source.--Tru co 22:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with that. Dahumorist (talk) 23:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I completely disagree that just by saying "inside reporter" makes your statement untrue. You never know if they're lying, spreading rumors or publishing misinformation. The official statements must be by FCW, WWE, or any other first-party sources [in this case, the Wrestler's own sites]. Raaggio ^T/_C Guest Book 01:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

When I said "inside reporter" I meant a reporter who has connections with WWE; they can't lie about that because the website could get sued for false publication of information.Tru co 01:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That is not a reason for proving they aren't lying. Raaggio ^T/_C Guest Book 02:15, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Eh, fine then, all developmental signings are only reliable if they appear in FCW, have been announced as a contracted superstar by FCW, or by WWE and their own personal statements.--Tru co 02:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That seems good, you can also add that if any WWE contracted talent [like JR in his blogs] would mention them, they can also be added. Raaggio ^T/_C Guest Book 02:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Added.Tru co 02:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

But many of them confirm on their personal site via MySpace, which is deemed unreliable. Dahumorist (talk) 04:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

3. Undecided If a wrestler themselves, WWE.com or a reliable source posts the hiring/firing of any wwe employee, then that should be allowed. As for the release of developmental talent, it should be placed under discussion here, if a reliable source is not posted, but pwinsider or the other newz sites post the release. We must consider this, since WWE.com does not post the release or signings of developmental talent, and we need to keep the page accurate as possiable. As I mentioned with Unassigned talent, remove the category all together. When the wrestler debuts in FCW or WWE television, then they can be added. If a accurate source, WWE.com, or the wrestler themselves (not myspace) states they have been signed to WWE and have not debuted yet, then they can be placed in "Other personnel" with the source and "Wrestler; yet to debut full time" next to their name.--NickSparrow (talk) 18:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is any point on posting why you're undecided.

REDIRECT User:Raaggio/Signature/Current 21:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, it depends where the original source of the information comes from. If each site keeps pointing to other sites about it, then no its not reliable. The only sources that can be taken into consideration are the Wrestling Observer if Dave Meltzer reports it or PW Torch.--Tru co 21:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Tag-Teams/Stables

Resolved

– Consensus seems to have appeared. D.M.N. (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

A tag team is an active duo of wrestlers who tag-team regularly, this is not an example of "Glamarella." A stable is more than a duo of people, which doesn't necessarily need to consist of wrestlers. Members should be added as they are officially stated via WWE.--Tru co 22:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Support Fine by me. Vjmlhds 22:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

2. Support Dahumorist (talk) 22:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

3. Support Hazardous Matt ' 22:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

4. Support (was an Oppose), Glamarella's a team, it's not that hard! Kalajan€₣ 14:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Take the definition of tag-team "An duo of wrestlers that wrestle matches together regularly" (meaning, at least every 2 weeks). A valet/wrestler combination is not a tag team, meaning that Glamarella is not a tag-team due to this definition.--Tru co 21:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

But they're a part time team. Kalajan€₣ 21:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

No they are not because the have not tag-teamed regularly, so it cannot be considered a team. It can be considered a valet/wrestler duo, but not a tag team. Like Maria and Marella were not a tag-team.--Tru co 22:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

But that's a different case, for they never tagged together (I think). Kalajan€₣ 22:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually I believe they did have a handful of tag matches. Nothing notable though. I believe to remember at least one. Hazardous Matt 22:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Yah I never saw them fight together. Kalajan€₣ 22:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyway, the Maria/Marella pairing is irrelevent to this. "Glamarella" is not a tag team. Hazardous Matt 22:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Dude, give it a rest, seriously. Marella and Beth have only tagged, as of late, every month probably. That is not a tag team, its a valet/wrestler combination. A tag team must tag team regularly like Miz and Morrison. Just because they have a tag team name does not mean they are a tag team. If in the future they tag team a lot, they can be named a tag team, but as of late, they are not.--Tru co 22:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not even a tag team name. It's a parody of the couple's name combinations like "Bennifer" or "Brangelina". Hazardous Matt 22:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I like this one: KalaKelly. :·) Okay I'll drop it. Kalajan€₣ 22:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

5. Support A team of a male/female should not be listed as a tag team unless they go after the tag team titles, or win them. Then they should be listed. A stable is 2 or more active members (managers/valets can count towards this).--NickSparrow (talk) 18:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

6. Support' Benton Tigers ' 21:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Inactivity

Resolved

– Consensus seems to have appeared. D.M.N. (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Inactivity of wrestlers falls under the criteria that they have not appeared on television over 3 weeks, a general average time. In addition, if they are out for other reasons they have stated or WWE has stated, that is qualified as sources.--Tru co 22:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Tentatively Support I think 30 days is the best time frame, but in principle I agree. Vjmlhds 22:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

2. Support I agree with the above, should be 30 days. Dahumorist (talk) 22:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

3. Support 30 days. Sometimes Creative just forgets someone's on the payroll. Hazardous Matt 22:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

4.- Support One month is 30 days right? Kalajan€₣ 14:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

5. Support - One month. If inactive, I suggest putting: Inactive; last seen on WWE television on ........ D.M.N. (talk) 17:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

6. Tentatively Support I think if a superstar is not on television or wrestling at live events, then they should be considered inactive. If the wrestler fails to be seen on television within 3 weeks, but wrestled in a dark match or on the road at live events. Then it should be noted by their name.--NickSparrow (talk) 18:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Which wrestler is on what brand?

Resolved

– Consensus seems to have appeared. D.M.N. (talk) 21:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

A wrestler belongs to the brand which WWE.com has them on, if they appear on other tv shows more regularly, like the Miz and Morrison on Raw, it is because WWE tapes ECW and Raw together and due to the "talent exchange" which is equivalent to the disbandment of the brand extension in a way.--Tru co 22:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Support Amen. Vjmlhds 22:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

2. Support Unless of course, WWE does a brand change on television and is slacks on switching them on the roster pages. Dahumorist (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

3. Support Hazardous Matt 22:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

4. Strong Support Whatever WWE says goes. Kalajan€₣ 14:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

5. Support Whichever brand WWE.com has them listed on, it should be like that here. They can appear on all the brands due to the talent exchange agreement.--NickSparrow (talk) 18:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

All because of "Unassigned Talent"

Here's an easy solution to all of our problems.

Get rid of the "unassigned talent" table.

All of these rookies are not worth the trouble of having this page locked.

I propose from now on unless there's a sourced article saying these rookies have appeared in FCW, then they are not to be included on the page, period.

Since there is too much controversy over what makes a reliable source, then let's make life easy on ourselves and don't include rookies who may or may not have signed contracts until we see them in a WWE or FCW ring or TV program.

This is getting out of hand and a hammer needs to be dropped or else this going to continue.

No TV or source showing they wrestled in the WWE system, no mention in the article, period and amen.

Vjmlhds 22:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, a list of reliable sources has been available for some time. It's just that not everyone's favorite website is listed as a reliable or trustworthy source. Though, if there is no source saying they've wrestled in the WWE system, then they probably haven't. Hazardous Matt 22:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I disagree vehemently with Vj. The problem that occurred with the page was that someone deleted the ones that were unsourced. Of course, previous to the page overhaul and redesign, most of those people DID have sources but they disappeared. The only reason an "edit war" occurred was because that SK dude insisted that my sources were unreliable. There is no reason these wrestlers should be left off the page because of one guy's opinion on what sites are reliable. WP:PW lists reliable sources and we should follow that. That's what it's there for! Dahumorist (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

This is the definition of employee:

An employee contributes labor and expertise to an endeavour. Employees perform the discrete activity of economic production. Of the three factors of production, employees usually provide the labour.

If the talent is unassigned and not competing, that means they have yet to begin fulfilling the labor they must do in their contracts. So if the person is not working, then they still aren't officially employed, just making checks for doing nothing. Raaggio ^T/_C Guest Book 02:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

That's ridiculous. If Mae Young can be listed as Occasional Appearances (and she should be, despite sitting at home), then signed talent are employees too. Dahumorist (talk) 05:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Whatever you decide to do with unassigned talent is fine by me, just as long as there's a set criteria.

Plus somebody needs to fix the page ASAP.

Somebody put Ricky Ortiz and Teddy Long on Smackdown so now both the SD and ECW tables are screwed up, and Victoria needs to be removed from Smackdown as she will retire after her match tonight. (WWE.com is reporting this, so it's not a spoiler).

Vjmlhds 13:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

As for Unassigned talent. I think it should be removed all together. It causes to much trouble for the page to always be protected. Lets leave the FCW section as is and update it as wrestlers appear/leave. Low-Ki can be added to the roster as "Kawal".

As for Tomko, why not place him under "Other personnel" due to being the only unassigned talent with a accurate source. We can put "Wrestler, yet to debut full time" next to his name. Same with Josie and Garrison. Everyone else removed until they debut on wwe television or debut in FCW.--NickSparrow (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Low-Ki II

Just wanted to further note some stuff regarding Low-Ki. He worked another FCW taping so he might as well be placed under their roster. He also is going by the name "Kawal" so at the very least that name change can be made. Hot Stuff International (talk) 08:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Also Carson Oakley changed his ringname to Alex Riley according to the FCW site. Dahumorist (talk) 18:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Christian Cage

This Is not a reliable source but it is the only one that I found that can say anything about his return to WWE. [3] Benton Tigers 21:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Not an RS. Period. ₰imon^KSK 21:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Is PW a reliable source? [4] Benton Tigers 18:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I found the official site she had the interview with confirming his return to WWE: http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/66103/EXCLUSIVE-Deep-impact --Mrrko (talk) 01:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

It says he "jumped ship" not that he went to WWE. That just means he's not with TNA anymore. Wait for something concrete. Hazardous Matt 01:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thats because she is saying that Cage was one of the first big names to jump from WWE to TNA, and will be the first to go back.--Mrrko (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Wait I'm confused. This page shows Christian Cage on the WWE roster as non signed talent. Wouldnt that mean that he is back. If it does not mean that then why is it shown.Jonathanmbarnes (talk) 04:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Hasn't this been discussed... say... 9999999999999 TIMES! He's not to be added until he is seen on WWE, or has confirmed himself or WWE that he's returning. Kalajan€·₣ 14:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Kalajan, you are right. Finally, you get it. Simon^KSK 01:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Well sorry. But if its not confirmed wiki admin usually will not take the time to add people who have not yet debuted on the show. Also wiki admin has told me that the Wrestler stating that he him self has signed a contract is not a reliable source since many wrestlers lie about the current status in a company. So there goes your deal with him saying that he said he is back.Jonathanmbarnes (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

he's on WWE ECW (DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!)--Wwe.fana (talk) 02:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The future endeavours club

Hardcore Holly is now out the door (WWE.com)

Vjmlhds 00:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see anything for Hardcore Holly, but I did see this: "ANDRE THE GIANT'S BOOK RELEASED". How sad. They're firing literature. Hazardous Matt 00:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Ha good one Matt Benton Tigers 01:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yah he is. See the WWE.com news[5]. Kalajan€·₣ 14:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Victoria (Lisa Marie Varon) retired.

(Note to an admin) On wwe.com Victoria announced she has retired from wrestling in the WWE. So she should be removed from the roster. Govvy (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

There are many updates needed to be made, but that will not happen until a consensus is made above.--Tru co 15:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Bob Holly and Victoria

{{editprotected}} Please remove the "Hardcore Holly" row from the "Male wrestlers" section under the "Raw" main header. Holly was released from the company, see this. Also, "Victoria" announced her retirement, and is no longer an employee. Please remove her from the "Female wrestlers" section under the "SmackDown" main header, see her new Alumni page and the results from her retirement episode of SmackDown. Thank you, iMatthew // talk // 15:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Beer! iMatthew // talk // 22:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

CHANGE THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE

Chris Jericho needs to be removed because he was fired on Monday Night Raw last week, and Victoria needs to be removed from the Divas because she retired after last night's Friday Night Smackdown, and Jeff Hardy I believe it is needs to be put as out of action for now due to a pyrotechnics accident on last night's friday night smackdown. --Chrismaster1 (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Well you must learn a thing or two from Wikipedia for the professional wrestling. Chris Jericho will be never fired. That was in kayfabe and probably he will return like Undertaker did. --Pavlen (talk) 18:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I now know that he didnt get fired since I saw RAW. But I do have a feeling that Randy Orton may be next since he punted Vince McMahon in the head. That's only a prediction though. --Chrismaster1 (talk) 21:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Thats something that hasn't happened and that probably never will. Kalajan€·₣ 21:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

What hasnt happened? Orton getting fired or Orton punting McMahon in the head? If its Orton punting McMahon in the head, it did happen. But until either No Way Out or Wrestlemania, its gonna be hell for Orton. --Chrismaster1 (talk) 19:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Jerico got fired and got his job back ages ago--Wwe.fana (talk) 02:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The name of the stable on the ECW Brand consisting of William Regal, Ezekiel Jackson, and Vladimir Kozlov is The Tormentors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.122.62.216 (talk) 02:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Why still protected?

I'm a bit baffled here. Obviously I missed the whole 'Unassigned talent' war that led to the protection but looking at the article the names in question were removed and aside from removing Holly and Victoria, the page seems to be in order. So can't the page be unprotected with the idea that all future 'unassigned talent' won't be added to the page if their signing is in doubt, until they pop up in FCW or wherever they're going to be placed? If we can figure out the Active/Inactive issues, this seems a lot easier to fix doesn't it? In fact I think it already has been so what's the deal? Hot Stuff International (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Kalajan€₣ 20:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Since I am unable to make edits at this time, I would just like to point out (so that someone can fix it) that "accessdate" is spelled "accesdate" at least once in this article. Please update with proper spelling so that the date will display properly. Thanks so much! -Whataworld06 (talk) 23:39, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Done Nikki♥311 05:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

FAQ page

Based on some of the consensus above, I've created an FAQ page, which is linked from the top. I urge all editors to read it. I've tagged some of the discussions as resolved, but one (the sources one) is unresloved as of now. D.M.N. (talk) 21:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yah thats actually all good. Good job. Kalajan€₣ 21:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

FCW

[6] It has loads of non-fcw wrestlers on it. Whats with that? Do they wrestle both places? Kalajan€₣ 21:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes some do but I think its to show that Jack Swagger is part of FCW alumini or however you spell that and that hes now a big star on ECW or something like that Adster95 10:52, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Theodore Long/Ricky Ortiz

Can someone please place Theodore Long and Ricky Ortiz into their proper categories. They belong in the ECW roster, and both are listed in the Smackdown roster. Thanks--NickSparrow (talk) 03:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Just now noticed Vickie Guerrero is no longer listed on the page anywhere. Her photo remains, but she was removed from the smackdown roster on this page. If someone could fix this. It would be greatly appreciated.--NickSparrow (talk) 03:10, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Dos cara Jr.

[7] Kalajan found a link. Looks official? If you all agree, then I will add a edit request for it to be puut in the article. Simon \\ c</small>^{Yes we can!} 19:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Simon... I don't know what to tell you but... the link is a blog, and it's just about a guy talking about Dos Caras Jr. refusing WWE's contract. Sorry for the bad news :/ Ra agg io 04:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Lookout for these talents

I'm just reposting the sources I found for the questionably signed talents. I think it's best to leave this section here on the talk page until reliable sources are found.

Here are the wrestlers in question. If/When I have found a reliable source, we should add them:

Tavita Fifita - http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/96505/More-Various-News:-More-Jericho-Publicity,-Dancing-With-the-Stars,-New-Sapolsky-Blog,-Another-Second-Generation-Talent-Signed,-More.htm

Chris Raaber - http://rajah.com/base/node/15095

WP:RS? Simon \\ KSK ^{Yes we can!} 18:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I guess I'll have to reiterate a couple things for people who don't seem to understand. These are NOT reliable sources, they are just tentative sources. These people should not be added to the page unless reasonable sources are found. I am simply posting these, so that we can be on the look-out for more reliable sources for these talents.

Additionally, FCW show results have made mention that there is a wrestler using the name Michael Leonard who is not yet accounted for on the roster. It is possible he is one of these people above, or perhaps he is Brian Jossie or Gavin Garrison. Be on the lookout for this information too. Dahumorist (talk) 18:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Johnny Riggs has been appearing in FCW as Dylan Klein. His MySpace profile pic was taken at an FCW show (he's being managed by Wesley Holiday). I'm not sure what more confirmation is needed, which is why I posted here first rather than edit the actual article. --James Duggan 05:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I was about to make the edit to the article. His appearance in FCW is confirmation, I'd say. Dahumorist (talk) 07:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Byron Wilcott wrestled at tonight's FCW taping. [8] --James Duggan 04:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

He's now been added. Also, be on the lookout for Ian Richardson's new ring name, same for PJ Black. Dahumorist (talk) 15:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Here are the results from the latest FCW TV taping. Here is a list of the new names in FCW: Tank Mulligan, Brian Jossie, Paul Lloyd, Tristan Delta, and Mike Hutter. We know Brian Jossie is signed, and Mike Hutter is one of the names above that was unconfirmed, though tonight confirms it. The other names I've never heard before. Some of them could be new names for existing wrestlers as Ian Richardson and PJ Black are now going under new names. I'll try and get confirmation on who's who. --James Duggan 06:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Wow, ok, I just checked the FCW website on a whim and the roster is completely updated. Tank Mulligan is Taylor Rotunda (his grandfather is Blackjack Mulligan), and Tristan Delta is Ian Richardson. They also have a profile for Paul Lloyd, but I don't recognize the picture, though I'm guessing PJ Black. They also have profiles of Jason Elliott (Jason Riggs), Matt Walsh, Windham Rotunda, Wes Brisco and Brett DiBiase. I'm updating our list now. --James Duggan 06:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks James. I'm glad I'm not the only one on top of the whole developmental scene here. Dahumorist (talk) 15:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, I google imaged Phil Shatter (Chad Lail), and he is definately Kip Christianson. Dahumorist (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Here's a Google search for "David Otunga WWE". Are any of these reliable enough to place Otunga on the roster? Also, here's a FloridaIndies.com thread saying that Otunga has appeared in an FCW ring. --James Duggan 22:10, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I love how there was a week-long lock on this page after a "massive edit war" over the previously listed talents, and now they ALL turned up in FCW. Dahumorist (talk) 00:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

According to the leaked Raw Script from March 2nd, Fifita is under contract, but not Raaber. --James Duggan 01:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Requesting an editor be blocked

I would like to request editor 76.206.63.198 be blocked.

He keeps moving wrestlers to Smackdown just for the hell of it.

This is repeated vandalism, and it needs to stop.

Thank You.

Vjmlhds 21:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Those requests aren't made here. I will place a warning or barring prior warnings recommend blocking. Cheers, JakeDHS07 22:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE Guilty party has been blocked for 1 week. Cheers, JakeDHS07 22:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Swagger and Henry

Are they a team? They probably are because if not why would Henry attack Hardy if he's currently feuding with Finlay? Yes I know... confirmation blablabla - Kalajan€·₣ 16:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Do they team on a regular basis? No, therefore they are not a team. D.M.N. (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Well yes, for they teamed last tuesday; being their debut. Kalajan€·₣ 18:55, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Debut of what? Teaming for one time? It's probably a temporary feud for the RR. Simon^KSK 18:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yah I know nothing's been confirmed; just keep an eye open. Kalajan€·₣ 19:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so why is it that every freakin' time someone teams up, you ignore the rules and ask if they are a team anyways? --Kaizer13 (talk) 21:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering how long you were going to take. If you can read, you'll see that I dropped it! ←Kala jan→ 21:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Shane McMahon

I want to make my case for Shane McMahon being on the active list so there's no misunderstandings.

In the current storyline, Shane's not here to be GM or authority figure, he's here specifically to kick Randy Orton's @$$ for kicking Vince in the head.

This equates to Jeff Jarrett's feud with Kurt Angle in TNA, where JJ stepped down from the front office so he could concentrate on dealing with Angle.

Since this current feud will be a focal point on Raw for the time being (with a PPV match no doubt in the works), leave Shane-O up on the active list till it dies down.

Thank You.

Vjmlhds 05:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Any opposes? ←Kala jan→ 14:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Predicting that there will be a PPV match and the fact that this is a major storyline is WP:CRYSTAL. Simon^KSK 21:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Add him in other onair talent. ←Kala jan→ 21:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Finlay & Hornswoggle

Why aren't they on the ECW tag team list any more? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrpengo88 (talk • contribs) 00:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Because they don't wrestle together, a tag team is an active duo of wrestlers who perform in the ring in a wrestling match consecutively, which Finaly and Hornswoggle do not.--TRU CO 00:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I suppose, but finlay is managed by hornswoggle, so maybe the "tag teams" section should be changed to "tag teams and management teams". User:Mrpengo88

Well I agree with that, but they do also team up quite regularly.*shrugs* Badit (talk) 15:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it should be changed to just teams--Wwe.fana (talk) 02:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Kizarny

He only wrestled one match and this says his profile page was removed [9] Pills 4 22:48, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Simply go to WWE.Com and check their Superstars section. If Kizarny's profile has been removed, then it should be notated next to his name that he's currently wrestling in FCW he's worked the last few set of tapings. If it hasn't, he stays listed under the Smackdown brand. Hot Stuff International (talk) 00:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

But he wrestled a houseshow this weekend. Dosen't that mean we should say that he wrestles in smackdown house shows?-- Badit Gold 15:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

His SmackDown profile is back up [10]. --James Duggan 00:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Was he Released--Dcheagle (talk) 05:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Santino and Beth

Beth is listed as Santino's valet. When was the last time Santino wrestled? I don't think since November when he lost his IC belt to Regal. I think it's more appropriate to say he is her valet. Tony2Times (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Each one is valet of the other. I think. Badit (talk) 15:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Valet means female manager--Wwe.fana (talk) 21:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Not according the several dictionaries I have access to. HAZardousMATT^toxic 16:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yet U wont show me any Reference--Wwe.fana (talk) 03:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Umm, valet means male servant, so technically, it's been backwards all along. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.101.163.3 (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Droz

Is he still with the company in some fashion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Info Fan (talk • contribs) 00:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Who is Droz? Red Rooster 96 12:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Droz is a former wrestler who became a Quadriplegic after a botched powerbomb by D'Lo Brown. He has no use of his legs. He is still employed by the company and writes wwe.com articles as well as ppv predictions. Cheers, JakeDHS07 16:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Gail Kim

http://www.wwe.com/content/media/video/vms/smackdown/2009/february15-21/9406452

That's from WWE.Com which verifies Gail has indeed re-signed with the company so she can be placed under unassigned talent until she makes her return on TV. Hot Stuff International (talk) 04:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Not really, it doesn't say she is signed. They brung out Flair last week, but he isn't signed. We can't say she is signed without her actually doing something besides a promo. The guy who had the Christopher Daniels type gimmick hasn't even shown up yet and all that stuff just stopped after one promo.--WillC 04:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Dude calm the hell down first off.I doubt WWE would bother showing a training video of someone not even on their pay roll. Not to mention you're a bit behind since Hade Vansen was released last month after they scrapped his gimmick and angle after the single vignette aired.. and he was clearly under contract anyway. But whatever.. sorry I even mentioned it.. didn't know it'd piss ya off so badly. Hot Stuff International (talk) 06:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

That video being on WWE.com is more than enough as far as I'm concerned. I SUPPORT adding her using that video as a source. Anyone else? Dahumorist (talk) 06:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Clam down, I'm not even remotely upset. Sorry, if it sounds like I am upset. I just think we should wait since the same could happen with Kim. You never know, she may ask for her release. It is better to wait until she appears on tv, as per the previous agreement to wait until people appear on tv to add them.--WillC 06:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes I forgot about that rule. I get what you're saying about waiting since plans could change and she might not even make it onto TV but I'd say at the moment she's under contract and at least should be put in unassigned talent. Look at Tomko.. he worked one Dark Match and hasn't been heard from since but he's still listed. Hot Stuff International (talk) 06:33, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

If they've already filmed a promo for Gail Kim she's obviously been signed to a contract, she should be listed in the Smackdown brand under female wrestlers as I believe the promo had the Smackdown symbol on it. ^BlackManta 11:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

FCW Name Changes

Here's the latest round of name changes made in FCW:

-Bryan Jossie is now Abraham Washington -Mike Hutter is now Derrick Bateman -Byron Willcott is now Lennox McEnroe -Paul Lloyd is now Jarred Black

Hot Stuff International (talk) 06:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Paul Lloyd/Jarred Black is now Justin Angel. Tristan Delta/Ian Richardson is now Troy Jackman. Dahumorist (talk) 07:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Inactivity Question

On his own page the last match listed for DJ Gabriel is January 13. Does anyone know if he's appeared on any house shows or on ECW (I sometimes miss) as of late? If not he should be noted as currently inactive/competing in FCW. Hot Stuff International (talk) 21:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

--DJ (w/ Alicia in tow) has been wrestling dark matches prior to the tapings for about the last month, so although he hasn't been on TV, he's still active.

Vjmlhds 23:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

March 2nd Raw Script Leaked

As many of you may have heard, the first draft of the March 2nd Raw script has been leaked on the internet. On the second last page, it lists the various roster members. Under FCW, it lists several interesting names. One name is Tevita Fifita, Haku's son who was rumored to have been signed. Another name is Jose Torres, which I am assuming is the real name of Black Pain/Sweet Papi Sanchez. The other name is Joe Nobles, and I'm not sure who he is, but Vic Adams is not listed, so my guess is they are one in the same. --James Duggan 01:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

That seems like a confirmation of Tevita Fifita's signing. Are there any objections to adding him? As for Joe Nobles, I don't know. I guess it makes most sense that its Vic Adams and that Andrew Vain was released as nobody has heard from him in months. Dahumorist (talk) 07:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

No objections here, it all makes sense. I'm going to go ahead and remove Andrew Vain unless anyone has any objections there. ^TheJay ^Experience 03:54, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Ongoing revamping

It appears that this article is undergoing a major revision, with tables listing each performer's ring name, real name, and other relevant information. While I'm sure this has been discussed and I have no real problem with it, my problem lies in the current organization of the article itself. As I type this, the entire "RAW" section is blank, apparently awaiting the revised format. I think that someone ought to keep the article in its former form until the revisions are completely ready (i.e., all tables with each performer's ring name/real name/etc. have been completed), and the tables should be worked on in the sandbox (or some other place. [[Briguy52748 (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)]] (P.S. — I think at the very least, a boilerplate should be added at the top of the page alerting readers about the page undergoing a major revamping, and not removed until the task is complete).

Stephanie McMahon

I'll admit she did show up on Raw this week BUT why is her picture next to the other on air talen for Raw?--Wwe.fana (talk) 11:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is Vickie Guerrero the GM of Raw? I do not like her as GM and why did she choose Raw over Smackdown? I would prefer Stephanie McMahon. After all, Stephanie is a better authority figure than Vickie! HabsMTL (talk) 02:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC) You don't talk about your opinion here--Wwe.fana (talk) 03:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Images

Wouldn't it be good if below the images of the Champions/Authority Figures, it said what title they had, or what show there the general manager of. Just a thought. Adam Penale (talk) 10:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

McMahons

Leave the McMahons on the Raw page.

Vince and Shane came back from their injuries to go after the Legacy.

The McMahons vs The Legacy has been an ongoing feud since the start of the year, when Randy Orton slapped and punted Vince, then beat Shane down, and finally attacked Stephanie.

Everybody's back now, and the "war" is on now as evidenced by the end of Raw.

So leave Vince and Shane on Raw because they are part of a feud, which is arguably the main feud right now in WWE.

Vjmlhds 18:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Updating citations

Just a reminder that when there are roster moves such as from the draft, the sources within articles need to have their links updated, not just the external links section. I just updated them all, but I won't feel like doing it every time.

Sicodelico Jr.and other possible signings

A number of sites have reported that WWE has signed Sicodelico Jr. This is because he posted pictures on his personal MySpace of him signing his papers with WWE. He will be added to the roster once he makes an appearance for FCW. In the meantime, here are the sources so far: http://rajah.com/base/node/15757 and http://www.myspace.com/sicodelicojr

Also, I'm going to take this opportunity to re-post a source for another supposed signing that occurred a little while ago for Chris "Bambikiller" Raaber. http://rajah.com/base/node/15095 Dahumorist (talk) 07:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

PWinsider and 411mania posted news that Lance Hoyt announced his signing with the WWE. http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/103098/Various-News:-Former-TNA-Star-Signs-With-WWE,-James-Laurinaitis-Has-No-Wrestling-Plans.htm Once again, when/if he appears with FCW or WWE itself, he can then be added. Dahumorist (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

A diva by the name of Carly debuted with FCW. She may be under official contract. No further info is available just yet. Here is a source http://rajah.com/base/node/15883 21:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

An update on this signing. I believe she is the recently signed "Britney Spears look-alike" Rachel Carr. http://www.sescoops.com/wwe/Britney_Spears_Body_Double_Training_At_WWE_Developmental.shtml Dahumorist (talk) 20:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Gerweck.net and 411mania.com are reporting the signing of a diva from National Wrestling Superstars named Miss April (real name April Jeanette). Perhaps this is Carly mentioned above, although it's probably an entirely different woman. Here are the sources http://www.gerweck.net/news/1241540323.shtml and http://www.411mania.com/wrestling/news/103764/WWE-News:-New-WWE-Show-in-France,-Batista-Interview,-New-Diva-Signed,-Eric-Escobar-on-the-Road,-More.htm Dahumorist (talk) 17:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Another reported signing is Fred Sampson. http://rajah.com/base/node/15975 Dahumorist (talk) 07:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Yet another signing is Serena Deeb. http://rajah.com/base/node/16122 Dahumorist (talk) 16:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Some reports about the resigning of Chris Masters have started popping up. Here's one. http://rajah.com/base/node/16244 Dahumorist (talk) 22:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Gerweck.net and Wrestling Observer Newsletter report the signing of a bodybuilder named Aaron Reed. http://www.gerweck.net/news/1245966618.shtml Dahumorist (talk) 15:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC) Here's another report that a guy named Ray Leppan was signed. Also, it gave the name Aaron Rodriquez as Sicoldelico's real name. Unrelated, I saw the signing of referee Shane Sewell somewhere as well. http://www.gerweck.net/news/1246313443.shtml Dahumorist (talk) 05:47, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Cena on Smackdown

Next to Edge's name there's a note that he appears on Raw due to his feud with John Cena. I think Cena should have a similar note, statinh that he appears on Smackdown due to his feud with Edge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JWC126 (talk • contribs) 00:50, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Tiffany

I recall her being ecw general manager, not interim. is it really? 3pointswish (talk) 06:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Nop it was announced by Teddy Long "And New ECW interim General Manager" Adster95 09:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

fair enough 3pointswish (talk) 02:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Santino/Santina

Should we list Santina and Santino seperatley? MC Steel (talk) 05:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

This is employees not characters = Nope --Senkris (talk) 22:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Tag Teams

Ok,I am sick and tired of everyone saying that Shelton Benjamin and Charlie Haas are The World's Greatest Tag Team name now.Its NOT true,they have not been called that one single time since they have reformed so STOP with putting it up that they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CentaurRULES (talk • contribs) 17:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

That is not true, as R-Truth stated "So The World's Greatest Tag Team are back together" BUT it has not been offically stated by WWE. MC Steel (talk) 00:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

No, most of WWE refers to them as the team formally known as the World's Greatest Tag Team and are announced as Shelton Benjamin and Charlie Haas. — Moe ε 23:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Taker's knee surgery?

Is it true that the Undertaker is having knee surgery? Danny Boy 420 (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Improve the page, don't waste time please--Senkris (talk) 22:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Senkris could have phrased that better, but is basically right. This is not a messageboard, it's meant to discuss ways to improve the article. TJ Spyke 02:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Section missing

Shouldn't there be a section for employees that are currently unassigned - e.g. Vickie Guerrero?--Senkris (talk) 22:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Vickie Guerrero left WWE. — Moe ε 23:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yah well some other guy that has signed a contract but isn't doing anything (Dos Caras Jr.)--Senkris (talk) 13:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Section suggestion

I think there should be a section which shows the superstars released over the past month, or so. So that people can know if their favorite superstars were fired or were just taking time off. I know that they can just look for their favorite superstar's name on the list, but it would be better and quicker to just compile them in one section.\:.:bibboorton:.:/ (talk) 04:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

We already have a page for alumni. --James Duggan 17:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

This is also not a fan site. This article isn't for fans to see how their favorite superstars are doing. – (iMatthew • talk) at 17:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Candace Michelle/Sim Snuka

They're names need to be added to the Alumni section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Info Fan (talk • contribs) 11:58, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Probably are already--Senkris (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

They still haven't been added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Info Fan (talk • contribs) 16:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

FCW Tag Team Champion references

I have been looking at wrestling website and I couldn't find anything about Trent Beretta and Caylen Croft winning the FCW Tag Team Champion. If they are then I need to see some references. --Wrestling-fantic (talk) 20:05, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

They didn't. There is just some ip going around changing things saying they did.--WillC 01:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm the one that changed it. My references are below. --James Duggan 00:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Then I think we should change it, because I even look at the tag team page and it says that Johnny Curtis and Tyler Reks are still the champion. --Wrestling-fantic (talk) 04:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's your reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TKiz1t4rgA&feature=channel_page. Not sure when it was taped, but it aired May 31, 2009. --James Duggan 00:19, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Here's another one: http://flrankings.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=13113. --James Duggan 00:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

All right thank you --Wrestling-fantic (talk) 01:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

FCW

http://flrankings.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=13156

Apparently, it turns out Kip Christianson isn't Phill Shatter (real name Chad Lail). Shatter is now working with TNA. If he's not Shatter, then who the heck is this guy? I'll update the roster to reflect that.

Also, a wrestler under the gimmick of Count Franklin Furter (someone has a cheesy sense of humor in FCW) debuted on a recent TV episode of FCW. Looking at the photo FCW has of Kip Christianson, they might be the same, but I'm not sure. FCW's website updated the talent roster, but no Furter, and Christianson is still there. --James Duggan 22:55, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Forums are not reliable sources.--WillC 01:52, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

No, but it's not the original source either. It has been reported on several of the "news" sites that Phill Shatter is debuting in TNA as a member of Foley's new security team. Besides, there wasn't really official confirmation on our part that Kip Christianson was in fact Phill Shatter.[11]

Define "news site". Are these the same sites that say, "it is rumored to..."? Yeah that would be a no.--WillC 04:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Unassigned talent

Checking history of the page there has been an unassigned talent section - which should be added as the page is called List of World Wrestling Entertainment employees - not List of World Wrestling Entertainment active employees -- Celtic Cross 23:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I repeat that-- Celtic Cross 15:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree there should be you are total right 82.21.192.131 (talk) 13:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Once there is someone under contract that is unassigned then we can re-add that section. Until then, it's pointless as it will be empty. --James Duggan 22:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)