Jump to content

Talk:Brodie Lee

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Luke Harper)
Former good article nomineeBrodie Lee was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 31, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed
In the newsA news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on December 27, 2020.

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion 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 proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 21:24, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brodie Lee → Luke Harper – Now that he is wrestling in WWE, he has gained far more exposure under the name than he did as "Brodie Lee." GeicoHen (talk) 22:35, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Requested move 2

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

The result of the move request was: Moved. — ΛΧΣ21 01:37, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Luke Harper → Brodie Lee – Bad move. Nobody said to the Project about the name change and the article was moved without votes or argumentation. This wrestler spend years in the indy circuit as Brodie Lee. NOw, he is the sidekick of Bray Wyatt. I think that now, Harper isn't his common name --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:44, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support (for now) - He's only been known as Luke Harper since November last year and has only been active on the main roster for about a month. I'd give him a few more months to establish himself before changing to Harper. Duffs101 (talk) 12:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Corey Graves, who is still on NXT, has his page at his NXT name, so it doesn't make sense that Luke Harper, who's been on the main roster for a month now, should have his page at his indy name. --GeicoHen (talk) 01:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lee had a very successfull career as indy wrestler, Graves don't. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 02:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 3

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

The result of the move request was: page moved. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:06, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Brodie Lee → Luke Harper – Reopening this discussion now that Luke Harper has gotten a lot more exposure. Since the last time I opened a move request, Harper has been involved in even more high profile angles alongside the Wyatt Family, such as those with CM Punk and Daniel Bryan. I believe it's safe to say that Luke Harper has usurped Brodie Lee as the common name. GeicoHen (talk) 02:28, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Luke Harper. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 March 2020

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

The result of the move request was: No consensus — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Harper → Brodie Lee – He’s using this name again in AEW, and news sources are now using that name, as per [1], [2]. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 23:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose I'm not a fan of a name change just after the wrestler changed the name. I understand the WP:NAMECHANGES policy, but also there is WP:COMMONNAME. I think Namechanges wasn't created with pro wrestling in mind, where a wrestler uses a lot of names and changes the ringname or stagename a lot. I think it's too soon for a change, since Huber is best known for a worldwide audience as Luke Harper, since he has worked in front of millions from 2013 to 2019. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If the editing community around professional wrestling wishes to create more granular naming guidelines, they are welcome to do so, but as it stands Wikipedia Policy ought prevail. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support change to either current stage name (Brodie Lee) or his real name (Jonathan Huber) with the first choice being Brodie Lee. Since he is no longer using the "Harper" name, it seems senseless to keep it beyond a redirect. We don't call the Undertaker "Buzz Sawyer" or "Mean Mark". We don't call Rotunda, Husky Harris. I simply don't see the reasoning in 'waiting' to update the page to catch up to the facts. While I do agree with HHH that the Luke Harper moniker is better known, and will be for a while - that is exactly one of the reasons we DO have redirects. Maybe the majority of fans won't know about the name change yet, but that's no reason for us to 'act dumb' or slow. — Ched (talk) 02:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We don't call Taker Buzz Sayer because Undertaker is the Common Name. But Konnor, Jack Swagger and Sin Cara still with their WWE names since are the common names, not Big Kon, Jake Hager and Cinta de Oro. I think we should wait until more people know him as Brodie Lee. Not using the "he works now as XX, change it". Look at ACH. He wrestled for years as ACH. But in WWE, he worked as Albert Hardie. Then, he worked as Jordan Myles and, in a few weeks, he left WWE, becoming ACH again. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He is no longer using the "Luke Harper" name.He is "Brodie Lee" in AEW.I support a redirect Darklord86 (talk) 04:49, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect would seem to accomplish the "both names" issue. The question is what the current article should be called, and WP:COMMONNAME makes it clear that name changes should be respected if reliable sources switch over, which they have.
  • Oppose Seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME as of now. Needs some time. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose We still know him as Luke Harper even to this day. Hansen SebastianTalk 13:05, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would point out the actual Wikipedia policy here, which is WP:NAMECHANGES. This policy states that "we give extra weight to reliable sources written after the name change. If the reliable sources written after the change is announced routinely use the new name, Wikipedia should follow suit and change relevant titles to match." The question of what he's better known for is not actually relevant to this discussion—the issue at hand is purely what name reliable sources are using following his return to using Brodie Lee as his professional name. And since basically all media covering professional wrestling is treating AEW as a major promotion, they've switched over to the new name. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weakest possible oppose because I can't see why anybody really cares what the latest kayfabe might be. It's weak because I'm inclined to just move and move on, no great damage, a redirect will take care of readers whichever way we go so waste no more time on it. On the other hand this would then be the fourth successful RM in just over that many years. But the reason it's technically an oppose is because nearly all the media that cover "professional" wrestling are IMO primary sources. The main exceptions would be business analysis of the (genuine) businesses involved (yes there are some if you dig a bit), and perhaps papers on the psychology behind the promotions and their popularity. And neither of these are likely to go into such trivial details, so probably no reliable secondary sources exist at all, recent or otherwise. Interesting thought? Andrewa (talk) 01:41, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This seems to me to misunderstand primary and secondary sources. A primary source would be AEW and WWE broadcasts and publicity material. Media covering professional wrestling is a secondary source. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • That is exactly the question. No, not all Media covering professional wrestling is a secondary source. It only becomes a secondary source if the writer is analysing the information rather than just repeating it. For example, a news item that merely repeats a press release is a primary source in exactly the same way that the press release itself is. Similarly, media items which uncritically repeat the content of AEW and WWE broadcasts and publicity material are primary. Andrewa (talk) 17:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support While I myself generally refer to him as Luke Harper, he's still not going to go back to that name. And since Dean Ambrose was shifted to Jon Moxley, this one should also follow suit to his new name since Harper/Lee is signed long-term to AEW. Saimcheeda (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that contextually he has rebranded as Brodie Lee on a major international promotion as a significant character. It's not like he's just appeared as a jobber, he has had weeks of build up to his reveal. People may be watching AEW and not follow WWE for years and will wonder who he is. Bazzarounii (talk) 14:32, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Many fans probably wonder who he is. I note that at least one other English Wikipedia has moved their article only once, in 2014, and that their lead currently refers to him by his real name [3] despite the article title. Andrewa (talk) 13:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

See User talk:Andrewa/kayfabe. Andrewa (talk) 15:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • They may or may not be primary, but any source that deals in kayfabe is strictly unreliable. I'm unaware of anything at Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Sources that reports kayfabe but some do report event results as they happen on TV. These aren't much different than recaps that The A.V. Club does for other TV shows. I don't really have any input into whether these are primary but I do think we should put more weight on actual reporting. I've long complained about the size of wrestler articles and lengthy summaries of onscreen feuds, which usually are sourced to those recaps.LM2000 (talk) 21:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is there much in the press these days that deals strictly in kayfabe? Certainly none of the sources cited in my move request. Both refer to "storylines," phrasing which acknowledges the scripted nature of events. And the same is true of other sources. [4] talks about contracts, not kayfabe at all. And [5] clarifies that an injury is in-storyline as opposed to real. This seems like it's not a concern with current sourcing. Winter's Tulpa (talk) 22:34, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • As I said, it's hard to discuss. There is two Wikipolicies: COMMONNAME and NAMECHANGE. As I said, I think the Namechange wasn't created with pro wrestling in mind since pro wrestlers can change the name so often (Huber has worked as Luke Harper, Harper and Brodie Lee. Aaron Haddad has worked as Damien Sandow, Damien Mizdow, Aaron Stevens and Aron Rex in just a few years). Pro wrestlers are artists. Actors who play a role in fiction. However, fiction takes place in the real world. 100% of the wrestlers (or 99%) are presented in public under his character name, so it becomes the stagename. Even in wrestling conventions or kayfabe-free interviews, they are presented under the character name. When the Seth Rollins-Becky Lynch relationship was reported, no media calls them Colby Lopez and Rebecca Quinn. The Undertaker was presented in a kayfabe-free interview as The Undertaker, not as Mark Callaway. Devon Hughes plays the character Brother D-Von in WWE. When he was inducteed in the Hall of Fame as Brother D-Von, he told his real life story. The Devon Hughes story. Also, he said he played a character, Deacon Devon. So, pro wrestling it's hard when the common name comes around. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Name change or Brodie Lee

[edit]

His gimmick is different from what it was on WWE and he's got a different name as well, it'd be better if the name and the picture could be changed to a more recent one. Sharinganrithwik (talk) 19:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:RM - Originalchampion (talk) 05:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in favor of this. I know it's policy to keep past rings name in a company as big as WWE where he had more accomplishments, but I don't necessarily agree with it. The moment he debuts in a new promotion, his name shouldve changed. Jedi Striker (talk) 18:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget WP:COMMONNAME. There is no point to change the name to a more obscure one. Most people remember No Way Jose, Darren Young and Konnor, not Levis Valenz, Fred Rosser or Big Kon. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:51, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 August 2020

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

The result of the move request was: moved. —usernamekiran (talk) 16:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Luke Harper → Brodie Lee – He recently won the AEW TNT Championship under "Brodie Lee" and is no longer using "Luke Harper". WP:NAMECHANGES and WP:COMMONNAME Originalchampion (talk) 01:59, 23 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 05:16, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Even if he works as Mr. Brodie Lee, most sources call him just Brodie Lee. At this point, it's the commonname. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA review undone

[edit]
Undone GA review
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Brodie Lee/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheEpicGhosty (talk · contribs) 16:42, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Will be giving this a shot.

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. 
Well-written prose.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. 
Complies well with style guidelines.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. 
More than sufficient references.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). 
Reliable sources for subject.
2c. it contains no original research. 
No OR.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. 
No copyvio or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. 
On topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). 
Stays on topic, unnecessary detail not added.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. 
Neutrally written.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. 
Lack of edit warring.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. 
Images well tagged.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. 
Relevant images, captions suitable.
7. Overall assessment. 
Overall I approve of this article and will pass it.
Hi @DTH89:, just a note to say I've undone the GA review per the conversation at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Recent flurry of GA Reviews and Noms that seem somewhat hurried.... I've re-added this article to the GAN queue at its original timestamp, so hopefully you'll get another review relatively quickly. Apologies for the inconvenience. I hope all is well. Ajpolino (talk) 22:50, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for his cause of death

[edit]

https://wrestlingnews.co/aew-news/aew-star-brodie-lee-has-passed-away/

https://www.mandatory.com/wrestlezone/news/1215606-brodie-lee-passes-away-at-41

Huber’s wife said that he passed away after battling a “non-COVID related lung issue” and getting treatment at the Mayo Clinic. MikaelaArsenault (talk) 02:05, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Seagull123 Φ 15:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ring names

[edit]

Are "Harper" and "Mr. Brodie Lee" really different ring names that need separate bold mentions from "Luke Harper" and "Brodie Lee"? --Khajidha (talk) 11:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:37, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Lee died from lung issues. It said that it is non-COVID19 related. I noticed that he left AEW (All Elite Wrestling) last October due to an undisclosed injury. Was the lung issue related to the undisclosed injury? Kingzwest (talk) (UTC)(talk)

We don't know --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:01, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The "undisclosed injury" was reported as a "possible ankle injury"[1] - Originalchampion (talk) 04:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
TMZ puts two and two together in hindsight. Can't link, but would prevent synthesis. "Ankle" was a fine guess back when nothing was known. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/report-brodie-lee-out-action-undisclosed-injury

GA review undone again

[edit]

Hi DTH89 just popping by to undo another malformed GA review. Preserving the text below but deleting the review page. Sorry you've had some bad luck with this. If you have questions or concerns feel free to ask at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. I hope all is well. Ajpolino (talk) 17:23, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Text of undone review
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: 71.183.212.131 (talk · contribs) 11:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    }
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Brodie Lee/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 22:30, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

[edit]
  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -
[edit]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]

General

[edit]

GA Review

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Review meta comments

[edit]
For these reasons I'm failing the article. I did go through the rest of the article, but I just kept coming up with these issues and it's clear the prose isn't written to GA standard.
I'd suggest a copyedit and to go through and reword to avoid proseline and rewrite from a non in-universe perspective. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:30, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cause of Death

[edit]

Is the cause of death parameter necessary in the infobox? As per the Template:Infobox person documentation, the |Death_cause= should only be included when the cause of death has significance for the subject's notability, e.g. James Dean, John Lennon. It should not be filled in for unremarkable deaths such as those from old age or routine illness, e.g. Bruce Forsyth, Eduard Khil. Huber died of routine illness and IMO should not be included in the infobox. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He died when he was 41 years old. Forsyth was 89, Khil was 77. Every source agrees that Lee' passing was unexpected (even Jim Cornette said he doesn't remember a case like Lee). I think the cause of death is very notable. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think age is a factor here. Younger people die because of routine illness too. Was the cause of Huber's death "significant for the subject's notability" is the question. The examples in the documentation, James Dean and John Lennon, died unconventional deaths, 'car accident' and 'gunshot wounds' respectively. Huber died because of a type of 'lung disease' which is "not unremarkable" and as per this not that rare either. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Age is a factor. A 80 years old man passing away because a lung infection is usual. A 40 years old man, isn't usual. As I said, sources covered his dead, most of them (journalist, wrestlers) agree that his death was a very unexpected and focuses on his age. (BTW, car accident is the "leading cause of death in the United States for people aged 1–54,1 and they are the leading cause of nonnatural death for U.S. citizens" [6]) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:13, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah "non-natural". That's why James Dean and John Lennon have the causes of their deaths mentioned. Can you point me to a consensus or guideline that says dying at the age of 40 because of a lung disease is notable or remarkable? - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:30, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, most sources, journalist and wrestlers pointed his age, which is remarkable. The article you linked says "usually diagnosed in people over 50 years of age". A man passing away 10 years before the usual age make this notable. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
News agencies and industry sources will find any death remarkable, especially if the subject has been working. Point is whether Wikipedia finds illness related death at the age of 40 remarkable. Chyna's death (accidental drug overdose) for example is notable since it is not due to routine illness, despite the fact that many people die from drug overdose cases. @Galatz, Wario-Man, and Rusted AutoParts: would you weigh in please. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's notable if sources find it notable. Not the same, for example, Patt Patterson passing away since he was 80 years old. But Lee was a young wrestler, working in the number 2 promotion in USA and suddenly, dies. A lot of websites covered his dead, focusing on his young age and the sudden of the events. For example, Freddie Mercury list the cause since, as a great performance, his death was also very notable. At this point, I think other users should give their opinions --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:18, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 August 2023

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

The result of the move request was: no consensus. The main issue here is which name of his will become more recognizable in a long-term historical perspective, an issue for which consensus does not seem to be reachable. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:34, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brodie Lee → Luke Harper – This was moved to brodie lee under the notion of it was his current name at the time he was in AEW, but now that isnt relevant at this point his name should revert to common name which is luke harper, as per 9 years in wwe. does less than 1 year in aew, the second company, count as more than the 9 years of wwe, the main company? Muur (talk) 21:37, 27 August 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confused the lede very confusingly says best known under the ring name of Brodie Lee. He is best known for his tenures in WWE as Luke Harper. What is best known as Brodie Lee or Luke Harper? Do we have any evidence as to what the COMMONNAME is? estar8806 (talk) ★ 23:11, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He was known as Brodie Lee during his indy career, and later in AEW. He was only known as Luke Harper in WWE. OP's argument is that the WWE ring name is the more WP:RECOGNIZABLE one. 162 etc. (talk) 23:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
oppose. even today, when sources talk about him, still using the Brodie Lee name. BTW, i changed the lead stating that he was known as Brodie Lee, mentioning that he worked for WWE,avoiding the "best known" part. but looks like it was reverted [7] [8] [9] -HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:02, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
comment Luke harper, 24,700,000 google search results. brodie lee, 12,400,000. luke harper doubles it.Muur (talk) 01:13, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject New York (state) has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:36, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
comment I agree that google search results has more for Harper than Lee. But per WP:NAMECHANGE " If the reliable sources written after the change is announced routinely use the new name, Wikipedia should follow suit and change relevant titles to match. " As I pointed, today no reliable source talks about him as Luke Harper, every new about him stills using the Brodie Lee name. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:21, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we're bound by NAMECHANGES here as the subject is deceased. It's okay to give more WEIGHT to historical sources from when he was prominently featured on the television of the largest wrestling company. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  13:13, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even after his death, reliable sources still calling him Brodie Lee. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But often with a note mentioning his WWE name. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  13:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Professional wrestling has been notified of this discussion. —usernamekiran (talk) 02:36, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
tv ratings are pretty much dead. everything is steaming or other means. you cant really use that to determine success and even without that how does half a year in aew equal 10 years in wweMuur (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A combination of him having used that name for years previously and WWE being unpopular in those times. People would probably be just as likely to identify him under either name but BBC felt comfortable enough running with Brodie in the headline.[10] Again, it really doesn't make a big difference which one we go with.LM2000 (talk) 01:48, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
saying wwe was unpopular is making stuff up and even if that was the case it got more tv views than aew does. like, this is weird logic. also your bbc article uses the name luke harper too so likeMuur (talk) 01:52, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 7 June 2024

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

The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 18:32, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brodie Lee → Jonathan Huber – I suggest that the article shouold be renamed after the wrestler's birth name, since the wrestler is no longer using his last ring name. (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Squared Circle Wrestling

[edit]

Hello. I have a question about the article. There is a section about his career with the independent promotion Squared Circle Wrestling. However, I don't see any reason to include too much weight with that promotion. SCW hasn't an article, so it's a no notable promotion (it was deleted in 2007 [16]). The section is sourced with WP:RESULTS. I don't see any source stating that his work with an independent promotion is that important. I would suggest to remove the section and include notable information in the independent circuit section. HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:29, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brodie_Lee&oldid=1229214349"