Jump to content

Talk:Ryback

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Ryback (wrestler))

-->

}}

On November 25, Ryback retired due to a deal where if CM Punk came back, he would officially retire. To Rybacks demise, CM Punk returned and he had to retire.

Most Recent Finishing Move

[edit]

Edited it on his current finisher, just added that he marches around the ring with his victim on his shoulders before slamming him. ----Arkitan 9-30-2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.102.133 (talk) 06:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bom Rasbena (talk) 21:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Second Chance

[edit]

It's being rumored that he's been resigned to the WWE. See the link below:

http://www.wrestlezone.com/article.php?articleid=226770305

75.70.219.136 (talk) 04:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Ring Name

[edit]

Ryback is now using the name Skip Sheffield in FCW. Here is the link: http://www.fcwwrestling.info/talent.html

Mentor in NXT

[edit]

on WWE Website it shows that MVP is not his mentor no more, William Regal is http://www.wwe.com/superstars/wwenxt/ --User:Vian_brazil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.15.31.118 (talk) 23:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page Move to Skip Sheffield

[edit]

It has been suggested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling that this page be moved to Skip Sheffield. Please discuss here, Thank you. Feedback ☎ 10:42, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finisher

[edit]

Why is his finisher called a running lariat here? I mean it isn't lariat and the source says it is a clothesline. Am I missing something here? 80.221.216.104 (talk) 00:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Last sentence

[edit]

Daniel Bryan was fired, not Darren Young. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.218.188.207 (talk) 23:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Return to action

[edit]

Isn't the sentence "Believed to return in early 2011" just speculation? So because some website says he'll be out for 6 months, that means it's concrete proof he'll return in early 2011? Theharshtruth (talk) 23:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, it's been fixed. Theharshtruth (talk) 03:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing surgries

[edit]

Can we add that Skip Sheffield is going to have his third and final surgery to repair his injury? Source is http://twitter.com/#!/Skip_Sheffield/status/79047174985494528 a verified twitter account.

Injury

[edit]

In the early life section, it says he had diarreha, which is obvious trolling and has no source, so I will be removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Varghoo (talk • contribs) 13:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed!

[edit]

I edited his page, because he's coming back to WWE as Ryback in January of 2012 but I cannot find a clear citation as proof. Those videos that WWE have on TV are for his Arnie type Ryback persona.78.148.97.27 (talk) 15:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, we don't want the usual hearsay appearing on the page this next week, so can I request a temporary members only editing of this article until early January?78.148.97.27 (talk) 15:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Turning Heel?

[edit]

It's a little early to say Ryback turned heel because he attacked Cena and I think that section needs to be removed. There have been instances in the past where a babyface attacked another babyface and didn't turn heel. Shawn Michaels costing Undertaker the World Heavyweight Championship a couple years ago is a good example. I think until WWE "officially" establishes that Ryback is a heel (since he still played up the "Feed Me More" chants) that section should be left off.66.192.63.2 (talk) 11:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I went ahead and removed that for what seems like the 13462557 time in the last couple weeks. It is WP:OR to assume he is a heel now. STATic message me! 15:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finisher

[edit]

I was just curious, in the article it lists his "Shock Drop" as a Cradle suplex lifted and dropped into a running horizontal muscle buster, It is more like a cradled Fireman's Carry into a running Samoan Drop/Muscle buster variation. I am not saying I am correct but this more accurately describes the move, please review this. Thank you - Halo 31887 (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jerk of the Month

[edit]

Does this award from WWE Magazine merit being added to the article? Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 02:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's more of an excuse to fill a magazine with text than an actual award. No ceremony, no trophy, no notability in the wrestling world. WWE Magazine is the real jerk! InedibleHulk (talk) 23:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's just a website thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterMan844 (talk • contribs) 09:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 21:52, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ryback (wrestler) → Ryback – He is the clear primary topic. The other two Rybacks on the disambiguation page are respectively the last name of a character and a historian whose page is a stub. This wrestler's ring name is just "Ryback," with there being nothing fancy about it. --Relisted. -- tariqabjotu 07:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC) GeicoHen (talk) 22:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Makes sense Under Siege wasn't a bad franchise, but it lasted about three hours. This Ryback has fed the action entertainment world much more. And yeah, that was Casey Ryback. This Ryback's too cool for first names (or last names, not clear). In any case, just unfancy "Ryback". Not even Ryback the Wrestler. The historian is apparently a real person, but likewise, he's called Timothy. And he's obscure, even by historian standards. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:29, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disagree No WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here. I don't think anyone can ascertain whether Ryan Reeves, the wrestler, will have staying power, and he's not known at all outside of US wrestling fans. Timothy Ryback may not have the wrestler's current notoriety, but he's an established scholar, holds significant academic positions, has written four books on major historical events, and has written for major publications. His article needs more background bio info, but if it gets that, it won't be a stub anymore. A better solution might be to move his page to Ryan "Ryback" Reeves, and have the DAB entry read Ryan "Ryback" Reeves, professional wrestler. Dovid (talk) 13:15, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have any articles named in that format, even for wrestlers commonly referred to like so (Greg "The Hammer" Valentine or Bret "The Hitman" Hart, for instance). In Ryback's case, I don't think he's ever been called that on TV or in a reliable source. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:09, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But there's a difference here. Timothy Ryback has a first name. The wrestler, on the other hand; his name is just "Ryback." Also, why are you suggesting that Ryback is unknown outside the U.S.? WWE is a worldwide promotion, and he's gotten major exposure all across the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeicoHen (talk • contribs) 08:03, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you're talking to Dovid, but since you indented, I'll say I read it as "fans of American pro wrestling", not "American fans of pro wrestling". Even Peruvians know Ryback. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:14, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No need to delete the disambig, just rename it with a (disambiguation) and point the hatnote there, rather than a hatnote for both other Rybacks. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:47, 2 September 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.

Not a face

[edit]

Whoever is calling Ryback a face just for beating up Bo Dallas, that is too premature. That is something a tweener can do. Bo is fair game for anyone these days. Keep in mind that Mark Henry just beat up Bo a week or two ago, and look where he is. 64.228.89.180 (talk) 03:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2014

[edit]

Please this Wikipedia article needs a editing please lend me edited please Thanks by your attention please :) 187.168.109.62 (talk) 03:21, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Stickee (talk) 04:41, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See here for how to edit protected pages. Edit requests are how you request an edit. Also remember, this is the English Wikipedia. Making ten mistakes in two lines isn't so bad on a Talk Page, but if you do it in articles, it'll either be removed or someone else will have to fix it. The Grammar and Punctuation sections of the Manual of Style can help. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:37, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism

[edit]

The "criticism" section is totally biased and POV. As it is unprecedented for a "criticism" section to be featured in a article for a wrestler I ask for its removal. In fact, there is no reason for this "criticism" section to be featured for Ryback and not for the thousands of other wrestlers who have been criticized like him. Wikipedia is not the place to insert speculations and forum-like rants, masquerading them as "criticism". Don't feed the fanboys and the haters. Andrea — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.36.117.16 (talk) 16:27, 25 December 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

I thought the same at first. Figured this was an offshoot of the CM Punk thing. That may have prompted it, but after some Googling, I feel Ryback is criticized by a wide enough variety of sources on a wide enough variety of aspects to warrant a section reflecting that reality. That's not to say he's the only one. Hulk Hogan and John Cena immediately spring to mind as others who could use a similar section. Whether they do isn't important to this article, though. Speculation and ranting are important, and not wanted. Could you share exactly where you see that? Looks like sourced quotes and facts to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:18, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Those are not facts, but opinions. Those don't come from journalists, but from self professed insiders. There is a strong difference between reliable references and articles written by fans. All the "criticism" section is based on opinions of supposed experts, who tells us simply some unenciclopedic wrestling gossip. The following are examples of why this section should be removed: 1) "He botched his Shell Shocked finishing maneuver multiple times". Wrestlers botch their moves on a weekly basis. If we should report all of these botches these kind of articles would rapidly grow to became ridiculous. 2) "According to ... Ziggler received a concussion from a stiff clothesline from Reeves in a January 2014 match": can we really reference a supposed concussion with this kind of opinion? 3) "Grantland writer David Shoemaker (who is he?), in recalling Reeves's 2006 suspension for a failed drug test, described him as "suspiciously muscled". In November 2014, recently retired wrestler CM Punk labelled Reeves as a "steroid guy": this passage is clearly hinting at Ryback abusing steroids, which is borderline defamatory, undemonstrated and surely POV. 4) all the long section about Ryback being "unsafe to wrestle" is all based on the recent Cm Punk's podcast and it is contradictory. 5) "PWInsider reported in October 2013 that Reeves was in the "dog house" within WWE due to perilous in-ring work and regressing skill": this is pure unenciclopedic speculation. 6) "Spectators at WWE events have directed chants of "You can't wrestle" at Reeves": really? Have we an idea about how many wrestlers have been made objects to this chant? Should we report it every time? 7) "Owing to similarities between the two characters, the sarcastic portmanteau of "Ryberg" was devised for Reeves": is this really notable?
And the list goes on and on. The section simply is unfit to an encyclopedia. If we don't do something about it, by removing it, next time we will have to read this king of childish biased portrayals on the likes of Cena, Rusev, Hogan, Flair, Reigns, ... Andrea
Everybody botches (except Mantaur), but it's somewhat notable to fail the same move more than once in the same match, especially if it hurts, especially if it's his most important move. That's why Hermann noted it. It's fairly rare, so fairly significant. When we say "according to Mike Johnson", the fact becomes about what Johnson said, not (necessarily) what happened. For that sort, he's the perfect reference.
The steroid implications are a bit heavy and a bit unfounded, bit of a POV problem. I don't find the Ryberg thing worth noting, maybe because of a personal hatred toward lazy portmanteaus. "Ryback" is already bad enough without "Rybaxel", and "Ryberg" just takes it into a JeriShowMizDowLayCool place that should not be. Once WWE starts acknowledging the name, maybe.
Absolutely agree on removing fan chants like "You Can't Wrestle", until they reach something truly notable, like "You Suck", "Yes! Yes! Yes! or "What?". For now, it's just a generic chant, like Hey, Hey, Goodbye. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PWInsider, PWTorch, Grantland etc. might be "self professed insiders" and mere "fans" in your eyes, but they're reliable sources per WP:PW/SG. If you don't like Wikipedia policy, go about changing it rather than complaining about it here. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 14:28, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
However, I think the chants, the funny nicknames (like ryberg) are notable. I mean, the fans say a lot of things. They usually say Cena can't wrestle, Darrren Young as Black Cena or Mason Ryan as Batistwo.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, there is no such things as "chants" and "funny nicknames" in other articles, as they are not notable. I don't need to change Wikipedia policies, I'm simply suggesting changing this article. This is a classical example of cherry picking "sources" to express a Personal Point of View, which is prohibited by Wikipedia policies. In fact, this kind of POV is featured only on the Ryback's article, which reflects a POV attitude. Andrea — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.47.2.234 (talk) 13:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. Given that you describe credible outlets (per Wikipedia policy, no less) as "haters", it seems like it's yourself who's bringing the POV, i.e. "How dare anyone write negatively about someone I like". As InedibleHulk said, Ryback has been widely criticised by a variety of sources. Ryback himself has responded to the "Goldberg" chants, the Tensai botch, and allegations of dangerous in-ring work after journalists elected to ask about them, crystallizing their notability. So we have his response, and Jericho and Piermarini's favourable comments for balance. Sorry if you can't handle the section, but Wikipedia isn't really about the personal feelings of users. Criticism of Ryback is out there, it's abundant, and it's published in top sources per WP:PW/SG. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 13:37, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a problem about a criticism section "per se", even if it is indeed vey peculiar for an article about a wrestler, as it is only feautured for this wrestler, who surely isn't the most controversial one nor in history neither in recent hystory. You haven't given reasons for why it is (and it will) feautured only here and not elsewhere. The fact it is only inserted here reflects the POV of the user who inserted it here. Don't be fooled by cherry picked sources. You can call volunterees "journalists" but they aren't. You can call encyclopedic a chant or a supposed nickname but they aren't. By the way, like I was saying, It's not only a problem about a criticism section, it's a problem about the peculiarity and type of criticism, limited to this particular wrestler and to aspects which, simply put, happens everyday (botches, chants...) and so are not relevant "per se". An encyclopedia must not be a recalling of everything related to a person, but only of the encyclopedic aspects of his persona. I have pointed out seven specific passages which aren't suited for an encyclopedia giving specific reasons for their removal in order to better explain what I'm trying to say. I'd like to discuss about these passages. @Phieuxghazzieh: By the way, can you please try not to personally attack me? Comment my suggestions, not me. Say whatever you think about them, do not try to say how I am feeling, what I think, what I like, ... I write on Wikipedia since years ago (not since one month ago), I do not need to be rudely teached about polices or "feelings" or to be said to "go away". I chose to write as an IP, but my opinion, as long as it is based on solid reasons, is to be considered in order to reach a consensus about the article. Thanks. Andrea
Just because it's not in other articles doesn't mean it's irrelevant or "POV". Not all album articles have a legacy section, for example, because people haven't gotten around to writing one (and maybe never will). "POV" nothing - all that's been used are cites from reliable sources, reflecting a cross section of what's out there. Both InedibleHulk and myself argue that there is widespread criticism of Ryback in various aspects, and so the criticism section reflects this. You're again casting aspersions on the credibility of the sources, but I already told you that PWInsider, PWTorch, Grantland etc. are considered fully reliable, even favoured sources. And I didn't tell you to "go away" or attack you at all. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 16:42, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Writing "go about changing it rather than complaining about it here" is like saying "go away". Mine and your ideas are clear: let other people express themselves on the matter. Andrea
I'm still not sure about Grantland. But I am sure we should all sign our comments. Looks like I'm saying what you are, whoever you are. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
David Shoemaker of Grantland is one of the preferred sources at WP:PW/SG. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 20:03, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Iadded my name. I think we should at least reach a compromise based on consensus, removing the parts that I and IncredibleHulk consider not deserving mentioning in the article. Andrea93.36.117.191 (talk) 15:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
InedibleHulk questioned Grantland, and I addressed his concerns by pointing out that the writer, David Shoemaker, is one of the preferred sources per Wikipedia policy. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Phieuxghazzieh: Actually IncredibleHulk wrote above on December 27, 2014 that he agreed that "The steroid implications are a bit heavy and a bit unfounded, bit of a POV problem" and he added that "I don't find the Ryberg thing worth noting" and that "Absolutely agree on removing fan chants like "You Can't Wrestle", until they reach something truly notable, like "You Suck", "Yes! Yes! Yes! or "What?". For now, it's just a generic chant, like Hey, Hey, Goodbye". So I think we should at least remove the passages related to the not-so-subtle steroid implications, the Ryberg nickname and the chants. @Starship.paint: I agree with your improvements to the article ;). Andrea93.36.120.210 (talk) 12:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I gave the first paragraph of the section a trim earlier today. Upon further reading of the section, it is apparent that it is far too detailed. These incidents can be summarized. As per WP:BLP: Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone. Do not give disproportionate space to particular viewpoints; the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all. I'll probably work on this tomorrow. Sourcing needs to be improved as well. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 13:45, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest, as I and IncredibleHulk wrote above, to remove the Ryberg thing (which is not notable) and the reference to the "you can't wrestle" chants (which are not a prerogative of Ryback). I also suggest removing the reference to the "Most overrated" award as it is already said later in the section "Championships and accomplishments". We should check if Ziggler has been really concussed by Ryback in 2014. This should at least resolve some of the big problems of this peculiar criticism section (which I understand now has been created by Phieuxghazzieh). Andrea 93.36.100.112 (talk) 13:02, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"You can't wrestle" is notable when it's bolstered by myriad other criticisms of his work. If one audience told Bret Hart he couldn't wrestle, that wouldn't be notable, but this is different. And yes, I kicked off the section - so what? What's your implication? Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 21:54, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You told me that I was "bringing the POV". Still the only article about a wrestler that don't deal only with its career but has a criticism section is this one. And it has been written by you on a wrestler that you clearly don't like, which is a demonstration of the POV nature of this section. That's why such a section, which is discouraged on Wikipedia, shouldn't be kept. By the way, you are going against consensus, as I wrote that I agreed with starship's changes, yet you rollbacked him multiple times on a correct edit, even accusing him of WP:OWN. You are also going against consensus as I and IncredibleHulk clearly wrote that those kind of things aren't really notable. By the way, considering notable the only time that someone has chanted "you can't wrestle" to Ryback is ridiculous: people who want to insult him notoriously chant "golberg", not "you can't wrestle", which I have never heard towards him. Maybe you don't realize it, buy saying things like "If one audience told Bret Hart he couldn't wrestle, that wouldn't be notable, but this is different" is the quintessential thing about having a POV issue. You should remember that here we have to report things in a NPOV way, avoiding our personal feelings on a person. Andrea93.36.138.182 (talk) 17:29, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little late to the party, having just been tipped by Andrea's post on WT:PW that this was going on. I don't see any reason for this section to exist. Most of the stuff seems reliably sourced, which is good, but almost all of it can be placed elsewhere the career section. For example, IGN blasting him for botching a move with Tensai should be mentioned after the Tensai match, Mike Johnson going after him for the botched Ziggler move go after the Ziggler match. We're more generous with Vince Russo's legacy section than we are here! If the section has to exist than it should be renamed "Reception" or something along that lines and we should strive to add some favorable coverage (stuff like Jericho defending him from Punk's criticisms and Goldberg saying he has potential is already there which is nice). I think that what we currently have violates WP:CSECTION and does the bare minimum to meet WP:NPOV.LM2000 (talk) 17:52, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I mostly agree with Vjmlhds' total removal of the section. As I said above, some of that stuff can be used in an appropriate section elsewhere but I'm opposed to a section dedicated to controversy.LM2000 (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about controversy. There is a considerable volume of criticism for Ryback, therefore a section is merited. I changed it to "reception" and will continue to seek out pro-Ryback views. I added a favourable comment from Jericho, but another user gutted it. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 21:06, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More pro-Ryback views added for balance. Phieuxghazzieh (talk) 21:29, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't feel strongly either way for its removal or dispersion into the main body of the article. What I do feel strongly about is that the section is too detailed in parts - botches are naturally hard to watch, no need for by an IB Times writer as "hard to watch". The whole Ryback and Jericho defending Ryback can be simply described as him and Jericho denying that he is a dangerous wrestler. The refusal to acknowledge that "a reason why his recent pushes were aborted" is an "alleged" rumour - beacuse it's obviously not confirmed by WWE is also disturbing. I think Ryback got praise when he was being Bully Ry around August 2013, information should be added then if it's out there. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 05:08, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
With "removing the section" I meant, as I hope it was clear, to rephrase and summarize the information in the section and to move it into the article. Personally i still think every piece of information should be transferred in the main body of the article, but if you disagree, it's ok with me. If you think the section should be kept I suggest to rephrase and summarize it as following:
"The Ryback character has been compared to Goldberg's gimmick.[sources n. 14, 99, 100 and 101]. That's why spectators at WWE events had been chanting "Goldberg" during Reeves' matches since 2012,[source n. 14] which Reeves said "never bothered [him]".[source n. 102] Even if he has been once praised for his portrayal of the Ryback character by wrestler Wade Barrett (source n. 104) and WWE Hall of Famer Mick Foley [source n.105], Reeves's in-ring work has been criticized by some writers and fans (sources n.106, 102, 108 109, 110, 111, 112). During one accident in particular, Reeves botched his "Shell Shocked" finishing on Tensai on the October 1, 2012 episode of Raw.[source n. 107]. In November 2014, recently retired wrestler CM Punk labelled Reeves as a "steroid guy" and said that wrestling him "took 20 years off" his life; he also claimed Reeves purposely broke his ribs.[113] Reeves denied the notion that he is a hazardous wrestler, and claimed that he would not be placed in matches with top WWE stars if he were as unsafe as some have claimed.[114] Veteran wrestler Chris Jericho also dismissed the allegations of dangerous in-ring performance directed at Reeves, saying: "Having worked with [him], I've never seen those types of things...it was always fun."[114]
What do you think? Andrea93.36.128.234 (talk) 10:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2015

[edit]

I would like to edit Wikipedia because I am passionate people need to get the exact facts Mummyitsnottheir (talk) 17:08, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 18:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

why did you lose from big show you are my favroute wrestling champion plese take your championship from big show — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.160.184 (talk) 09:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Flyback

[edit]

Ryback did a move jumping off the top of the turnbuckle against Seth Rollins tonight, announcer called it "flyback" but I don't know the technical name for it. Would like to add it to his 'in wrestling' moveset. Ranze (talk) 01:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Break and Take

[edit]

How many times will Ryback have to repeat "Break it, take it" in reference to the glass ceiling and brass ring before we can list it as a catch phrase? Ranze (talk) 03:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

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

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:48, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request

[edit]

Please revert this pair of edits to the previous version as the information inserted is not sourced per WP:RS and appears to be original research. 1.125.48.112 (talk) 08:03, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 11:45, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cryback citations

[edit]

Given that this redirect has been nominated for deletion and people have deleted this and its supporting sources from the page, I am going to open a community discussion about the validity of both this existing as a redirect (low standard of proof) and it existing as a listed nickname (slightly higher standard of proof).

So let's begin with the primaries. Firstly,

  • Jericho, Chris (28 June 2013). "Justin Gabriel vs. Ryback". SmackDown. Episode 723. They should probably change your name from Ryback to Cryback. Say it with me no! Cryback! Cryback!

It's not just him saying it: you hear a significant portion of the crowd continue the chant after Jericho goes silent. It is repeated 7 times by my count. You probably had hundreds of people repeating this over a half dozen times on a highly rated television program. But it didn't stop June 28th...

This didn't happen in isolation, it is a follow-up to Jericho's commentary on Raw:

Jericho, Chris (1 July 2013). "The Miz vs. Ryback". Raw. Episode 1049. Cryback .. Cryback just waved off his own match. Listen to the fans' reaction here, booing Cryback for doing just that.

Recent events still show this name is in the current consciousness:

  • Dilbert, Ryan (2 September 2016). "Ryback Is Right: WWE Missed the Boat with the Big Guy". During a match with The Miz, Ryback pulled the WWE version of boxing's famous "No mas" incident. The Big Guy quit mid-match, refusing to take any more of The Miz's kicks. That opened the door for rival Chris Jericho to start calling him "Cryback."

I open this to criticism about whether or not we should include this under 'nicknames' but would like to address whether or not to have the Cryback redirect, because we can have a redirect here (cheaply) without needing to list it. Ranze (talk) 07:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Ryback. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Independent circuit

[edit]

@STATicVapor: I don't understand why you have to write "April" when he clearly lost a match on "09.04.2017" ie 9th April 2017. The next match he fought was on "05.08.2017" ie is 5th August 2017. That's when his winning streak began. That's why we should mention: 

He has not lost a match on the independent circuit since August 2017.

Check the following text from the source. It is in "newest first" order. Now if you are confused with Date format (like in here) i.e. dmy or mdy, it is clear that the source is in dmy (Date-Month-Year) format.

21# 05.08.2017 Rock And Roll Wrestling RRW Title: Ryback defeats Sean Kustom (c) - TITLE CHANGE !!! RRW Feed Me More Tour - Tag 1 - Event @ Wollongong Snakepit in Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia

22# 09.04.2017 Heroes And Legends Wrestling HLW Heavyweight Title Three Way: Dru Skillz defeats Ryback (c) and Kongo Kong - TITLE CHANGE !!! HLW Heroes & Legends VIII - Event @ Allen County War Memorial Coliseum in Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA

23# 08.04.2017 International Wrestling Cartel Three On Two Handicap: Andrew Palace & Ryback defeat Team Storm (Jack Pollock, Jaxon Argos & RC Dupree) IWC Night Of The Superstars 6 - Event @ Meadville Area High School in Meadville, Pennsylvania, USA

24# 30.03.2017 WrestlePro Ryback defeats Colt Cabana WrestlePro - Event @ Wyndham Orlando Resort International Drive in Orlando, Florida, USA

Also note that the entry "#24 - 30.03.2017 WrestlePro Ryback defeats Colt Cabana WrestlePro - Event @ Wyndham Orlando Resort International Drive in Orlando, Florida, USA" was for an event on 30th March 2017 since there is no 30th Month in the calendar! - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you mean, he hasn't lost since his match in April, but he's on a winning streak since August, so what you're putting is the right thing here. Sorry I thought you were unfamiliar with the site and just reading it wrong. STATic message me! 05:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem dude. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:43, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retirement

[edit]

On November 25, Ryback was forced to officially retire due to a vow that if CM Punk returned, he would retire. CM Punk pulled up to WWE Survivor Series at Chicago and brung Ryback’s career to its end. 86.23.245.248 (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This obviously wasn't a sincere commitment on his part. He's already said he's not retiring. — Czello (music) 17:18, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ryback&oldid=1230799842"