Talk:Steve Borden/Archive 1

Trainer and History mistakes

--Unopeneddoor 00:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)Sting and Warrior were trained by Bill ANderson, not by Red Bastien. I have corrected this on Sting's page and will correct on Warrior.[reply]

For crying out loud people his trainer was BIll Anderson. Red Bastien was a WORKED trainer. --67.52.102.66 03:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tht is correct his trainer was NOT Red Bastien. i don't know why it was changed back. --Unopeneddoor 03:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Steve Borden

As per what was discussed with the Samoa Joe/Joe Seona discussion on the Wikiproject, I switched Sting (wrestler) to Steve Borden on the basis of Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(people) and the fact that Sting has repeatedly been referred to as Steve Borden on episodes of TNA Impact and on TNA Destination X 2006. He also used his real name in his biographical video. Clint 10:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sting (wrestler) has 1,820,000 Google hits. "Steve Borden" has a comparatively paltry 37,000. The Naming Conventions page's first principle is "the name that is most generally recognisable", i.e. the most commonly used name. Moreover, you cannot execute cut-and-paste moves. Moves must be discussed, voted on and then implemented by an administrator. McPhail 15:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does it matter if Sting (wrestler) will just redirect to Steve Borden? And for the whole "name that is most generally recognisable", how does that work for Adam Copeland, Amy Dumas, Chris Parks, David Cash, Mark LoMonaco, etc? I'm seeing a heavy degree of inconsistancy here. I also don't appreciate reverts of real edits being construed as vandalism (albeit that's a qualm I have with someone else right now)... Clint 21:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was not a real edit, it was vandalism. Page moves must be done appropriately. Like I pointed out earlier, your actions would have destroyed the edit history, had people continued on contributing to the "new" article.

↪Lakes (Talk) 08:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move to Steve Borden

While the initial move may not have been done right, I would still like to propose that this be moved to Steve Borden, as stylistically, we should be avoiding using parentheticals as much as is reasonably possible. -Darryl Hamlin 14:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support I even think it should be moved to Sting, even though that will obviously never happen. (wrestler) looks ugly and his real name is fairly well known. I'll fix the resulting redirects myself if I have to! Tromboneguy0186 19:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I just realized I have no clue how to do a move, could someone do it for me the right way, please? -Darryl Hamlin 21:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trademark

It was claimed that Borden owns the trademark on the name Sting. In fact there can be and are multiple trademarks including the word "sting", but only two of them are entertainers. Neither one of them is listed in the USPTO database [the UK database was down as I write], nor does the website therealsting.com display a ™ or ® symbol. This probably indicates that it is a common-law mark (established by usage). In any case, registration of a trademark gives you certain rights under the law and can strengthen a claim of intellectual property infringement. Additionally, Sting the musician was using the term long before Sting the wrestler (which is one possible reason for non-registration). It is possible that despite non-registration by either, Sumner and Borden have reached a private settlement, but stating that Borden receives a portion of Sumner's profits is probably incorrect, and is a claim that should require a citation from authoritative media such as a newspaper. --Dhartung | Talk 22:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Borden trademarked 'Sting' for use in entertainment services, namely live and televised performances by a professional wrestler/entertainer in 1995, however, it does does not preclude others from using the name outside of wrestling, and Gordon Sumner did indeed use the name in the seventies, whereas Steven borden first used it in 1986. Refer to USPTO serial number 74629288 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.62.162.197 (talk) 09:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What role do World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (which bought out World Championship Wrestling and owns footage, which includes Sting matches), Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, Inc. (for whom Sting is now employed), and Steve Borden (Sting himself) have in regard to the ownership rights to the wrestling name STING? --Eric in Indiana

Wrestlers sometimes own the rights to their ring names (and likenesses, in the case of masked/painted wrestlers or wrestlers identified by specific ring gear) - Hulk Hogan and The Rock are obvious examples of this. Rob Van Dam made minor headlines earlier this year when he voluntarily gave ownership of that name to WWE. Tromboneguy0186 02:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

The following is a closed 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 Sting (wrestler) → Steve Borden — "(wrestler) looks really ugly and his real name is fairly well known. Move would follow the examples of Terry Brunk, Nelson Erazo, Amy Dumas and Glenn Jacobs, all of whom would also require "(wrestler)" if titled under their ring names; move proposed on talk page already and there are no objections, but a redirect is blocking the move. Tromboneguy0186 02:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

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

Strongly oppose; he has wrestled as Sting for over 20 years, and it is by the more common name - Sting (wrestler) returns 1,490,000 results on Google, while Steve Borden returns 57,500. The argument that the current page title is "ugly" is a fairly irrelevant argument. McPhail 12:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per McPhail. I don't think the disambiguation necesarily warrants the change.--Darren Jowalsen 20:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn It seems I made a wildly inaccurate assumption when proposing this. Tromboneguy0186 23:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Add any additional comments

I'd be fine with that if Sting were the disambiguation page, but it isn't. Tromboneguy0186 23:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, can someone then tell me why those articles I mentioned above aren't at Sabu (wrestler), Homicide (wrestler), Lita (wrestler), and Kane (wrestler)? Those names are definitely more well known than their birth names. Tromboneguy0186 23:38, 27 June 2006 (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.

Aug 24 IMPACT! Paragraph

When I wrote that quote on here, I wrote it to show who you was referring to, not to be a link to Jeff Jarrett.

How it was actually said: "You couldn't comprehend..." not "You Jarrett couldn't comprehend...". Unless I'm wrong (and someone correct me if it is), when you have a phrase like that and want to show who/what they are talking about in the quote, you use the [] brackets. Which is why I published it as "You [Jarrett] couldn't comprehend..." Mike 03:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TNA section tagged for cleanup

I tagged the section on Sting's career in TNA for cleanup - there's way too much detail there. Events can be summarized to make the section shorter. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Number of World title reigns

Sinc when Sting is a 9 times NWA/WCW World champion ? He wins the WCW title 6 times (like Hogan, Flair is n°1 with 8 reigns), and 1 time NWA World champion. The International title never was a world championship, that's why Rick Rude never won a world title.

Actually, if you ever watched some of the older WCW programming they often referred to that title as the "World Heavyweight Championship as recognized by WCW International." Also when WCW was hyping the champion vs. champion match at the Clash of the Champions XXVII against Ric Flair, they also hyped Sting as being a World Champion (again as recognized by WCW International), so yes that championship should be recognized as a World Title. Rick Rude has never won a NWA World Heavyweight Championship as the committee at the time did not want the NWA World Heavyweight Title on Rick Rude and tried to pressure WCW to keeping it on Ric Flair which is the whole reason the International World Heavyweight Title came into existence in the first place.

I don't think Sting's reign as WWA Heavyweight Champion should be considered a World Title reign. World Wrestling All-Stars more or less was nothing more than an independant wrestling company that ran most of it shows outside of North America and really had no impact on the wrestling business at all. Ring of Honor has had more of an impact in wrestling than WWA and I don't even consider the ROH Heavyweight Championship a World Title although they are trying to play it off as being that as such.

Finally, Sting has been a NWA/WCW World Champion 9 times, not 11. I don't know who has changed it to 11 but it needs to be reverted back to 9 (and no I won't change it because it's not my job to and I won't waste time doing these things knowing some of the egos that are involved in the site and how they want things done "their way." This is why I merely make suggestions from time to time.). Sting has won 9 WCW/NWA World Heavyweight Championships during his tenure in WCW and the other two World Title reigns (if you are going to count WWA Heavyweight Title as a World Title, which I strongly disagree with) were acheived after his time with WCW was over so therefore these have no bearing on his championship history with World Championship Wrestling and leaving the statement "Combined with two NWA World Title reigns, two WCW International World Title reigns, and one WWA World Title reign, Sting has been a World Heavyweight Champion 11 times, the second most in NWA/WCW history behind Ric Flair" is a horrible misrepresentation of wrestling history as the later 2 championship reigns of his wrestling career were not related to WCW in no way, shape or form. 71.29.39.44 10:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever took the pics that I added off

You are a jackass. Thank you for ruining my day.

Should there be at least one pic of Sting in his pre-Crow look? He did wrestle with that look for almost ten years.BoosterBronze 20:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Sting became the face of WCW long before the Crow look. That Crow look only shows part of his career. A very small part. You can't ignore the major part of his career.Stingstungme 07:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second this one, albeit a year-and-a-half late. I will always remember him as the old Sting with the short blonde hair and colored outfit and facepaint. Middleeasternfilms (talk) 02:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Makeup

Sting's facepaint has changed numerous times in the last decade, just a glance at the pics on this page show that. Just because that line was on TNA's website, doens't make it true. BoosterBronze 02:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manager

I've been reading alot of these Wikipedia articles on professional wrestlers where some of the editors have listed people who weren't really managers for wrestlers...So I guess what I'm asking here to all the people who actually take the time to edit these articles, what in your mind constitues being a wrestling manager?

For instance, while I agree that Eddie Gilbert and Miss Elizabeth should be considered managers for Sting...I don't agree that Lex Luger and Christian Cage should be listed as managers for Sting since they really never "managed" Sting. If all it takes to be considered a manager for a wrestler to accompany another wrestler to ringside, then the list of managers for every wrestler listed on Wikipedia should grow substantially larger. Hell off the top of my head I can list 10 wrestlers who have accompanied Sting to the ring but that doesn't necessarily mean they were Sting's managers. 71.29.39.44 04:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrestling Moves

I think Frog Splash in Wrestling Facts needs to replaced with a traditional splash or basic splash as Sting has never performed what many would consider to be a Frog Splash. 71.29.39.44 04:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Iron Sheik and Jack Victory

Calling a former WWE Champion and others sub par is subjective.

Crow Sting Picture

Can we PLEASE get a better picture of The Crow Sting...one from like 97 where he isnt all smiling? That picture doesnt fit The Crow Sting character at all...

Cancer

It's mentioned that Sting has said that in winning the world title, he has been inflicted with a cancer. WTF does that mean? User:Killswitch Engage

The "cancer" of the world title is putting the responsibilities of being World Champion above your personal life, as well as your family. Jeff Jarret's interview after he lost the belt revealed he was "going home" to look after his family, which he could not do due to holding the world title. Sting's promo pretty much implied that he had inherited what had driven Jarret to be the "cancer" of TNA and that the belt was the true cause Dr. R.K.Z

Moveset

I added 3 moves that Sting used at Bound For Glory. Don't remove them because they have been documented as being used by him. User:Noah's Arc

Just because they were used at one PPV, doesn't mean they should go on his moveset, unless you have any other evidence that he's used them than just that one time. Armedhamster —Preceding unsigned comment added by Armedhamster (talk • contribs) 05:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scorpion Death Lock

I've noticed that TNA and Mike Tenay have consistently referred to Sting' fininshing move as just "The Scorpion." I noticed it not too long after Chris Benoit and his family died. And I wondered if Tenay/TNA dropped "Death Lock" the name, because of Benoit. Anybody know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.245.207.219 (talk) 06:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weight Loss

It's been documeneted that he's lossed 20 pounds, so it should be changed. User:Noah's Arc

Trivia- WCW Title

I cut the comment about Sting being the only man to hold the NWA world title before and after it was named the WCW title. The NWA World title was never named the WCW title, the WCW World Title was a different title that recognized the same champion as the NWA title for a brief period of time. The NWA World Title has never changed its name. BoosterBronze 04:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, two different World Title reigns but under the same physical belt, much like the NWA/WCW World Tag Team Championship before they were split as well.151.213.107.237 15:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Birthdate

On Sting's website, therealsting.com, he has his birthday listed as March 20, 1959. You can view it here ....http://therealsting.com/bio.php. Stingstungme 07:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC) stingstungme[reply]

32 year career, wrestling since the late 70's

I am lost here. He has been wrestling for 32 years? since the late seventies?

Reading the article, it puts Sting initially wrestling in UWF back in 1986. That is only 21 years ago. Someone needs to either account for the other 11 years or change that.

Being a year or two off is one thing but we are adding in a decade to his career. Stingstungme 07:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, if you look at the Bladerunners page, it puts his tagteam as starting in 1985. We are up to 22 years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runners

It mentions the Powerteam USA before Bladerunners which was also in 1985. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerteam_USA Also if you look at http://www.dread2099.50megs.com/warrior.html, it mentions 1985 as when the Bladerunners started.

With that, then i am obliged to think that the 32 years was merely a mathematical error. I will give it a few days then change it.Stingstungme 07:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NO

to the retard who said that sting stole his entrance from taker...NO. sting was around YEARS before undertaker using that entrance and then taker stole it. YOU SUCK AND KNOW NOTHING ABOUT WRESTLING.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy1292 (talk • contribs)

Neither Wrestler stole it from the other! Taker is in a different federation also! Sting and Taker have alternate characters and personalities, besides the entrances were not exactly, or even strongly similar.

I don't think that lights turning off constitutes a similar entrance... i think it's safe to say that neither of the individuals had much idea of what hey were talking about, the third poster who posted the message above mine of course excluded. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.53.252 (talk) 07:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free Use Image

I added a free use image of his old gimmick. I couldn't find a free use image of his Crow gimmick. Mwutz 03:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All of the Free Use Images from the past couple of months really look this page look lame. If Sting wasn't a wrestler, he wouldn't even have a Wikipedia page, so we should have pictures of Sting with facepaint, not Steve Borden without facepaint if you ask me.

i beleve tha steve borden should be changed back to sting. I also beleve that sting should direct to the steve borden page not the sting the singer page. the reson i beleve this change should be made is because steve borden legely owns the copyrights to the name sting. which is the reson why he can work for diferent companies and still retain his name, contrary to most other profesinol westelers.

Halloween Havoc Match

I keep hearing about this one match Sting was in back in WCW where WCW had a bunch of other wrestlers dress up like the various Sting's from the past and attack Sting, Steve McMichael being one of the imposters who dressed up like the Surfer style sting I think. Does anyone know where I can find video footage/pictures/etc of this match? I'm not even sure it was at Halloween Havoc.....I'm hoping someones got video footage of this event on Youtube 65.93.59.32 05:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was mentioned a while a go on Wrestlecrap PayneXKiller 22:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question...

I know it says Sting never worked for WWE. But technically, didn't he work for Vince McMahon and the WWF? The last episode of Nitro was broadcast after Vince bought WCW, and Sting worked that show. So technically, didn't he work for WWF and Vince for a day? Or would that not count because he was under contract to Ted Turner, not WCW/WWF? 68.236.152.147 23:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When Vince Mcmahon bought WCW, he did not receive the contracts of the bigger names in WCW, such as Hulk Hogan, Kevin Nash, Sting, Etc. They still belonged to Time Warner.

I'm also pretty sure that the last Nitro was booked by whoever was in charge of creative at that point. A lot of it still comes down to that, in my opinion. TonyFreakinAlmeida 01:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that's a great point. For the last Nitro, the WWF was indeed in charge of the matches and whatnot. Mshake3 03:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So he was not under contract to Vince McMahon, but he worked for him for one night? That seems to be the impression I get. But I guess technically you could look at it either way. 70.109.106.170 12:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The last post and the first post were both mine. I don't know why my IP changed. 70.109.106.170 21:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact of the matter is that Sting did indeed perform for the WWE for one night. Vince McMahon and the WWE owned WCW on the last Nitro. So I propise a change to that line. I'm adding two words, hope you like. L2K (talk) 22:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THe matches were set months ahead in wcw/nitro. So technically (and correctly) the match was under turners creative team control. Maybe with imagination you could say he did one match for McMahon, but if you want to be correct, "he performed under the wcw/nitro flag up to the last match, which then saw absorbtion by the WWE/Mcmahon's" Grelnar (talk) 08:19, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV

This is in the opening paragraph of the article:

"He is arguably the highest profile wrestler not to have worked for WWE."

Isn't that POV? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.215.46.78 (talk) 21:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that it isn't, seeing as how his popularity and merchandise sales support that. Maybe revise the line to "Based on merchandise sales and overall popularity, Borden is arguably the highest profile wrestler of the current era not have have worked for WWE." MDowdal 04:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 time world champion

should it be mention that with the WCW AWA NWA and Now TNA that sting is a 10 time world champion Supermike 05:23, October 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 16:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to PWI he's only a 9 time World Champ. 2 NWA, 6 WCW, 1 TNA. You could count more if you counted the WWA and WCW International Title reigns though, but that isn't noteworthy since it's basically an opinion as we have a "standard" that is documented and sourced here for Wikipedia that gives world title status' and that is Pro Wrestling Illustrated. TonyFreakinAlmeida 13:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Jarretts page it mentions him as a 12 time champion, while counting his WWA reigns. Also why does PWI have the say on what is and is not a "World" title? If the title has been defended on more than one continent it is a world title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AD Double J (talk • contribs) 22:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

than almost every title is a world title. Altenhofen (talk) 01:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WWA Title is a World Title. It was defended in many different countries/continents, and WWA was on Pay-Per-View seen worldwide. MC511 19:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is an 11-time World Champion. WWA shouldn't count, but the two WCW International Champion reigns should. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.108.199 (talk) 16:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, guys I recognize that you guys feel that the WWA title and WCW-I heavyweight title were legitimate world championships, hell I would say they were also world championships, but we have a standard here that is documented for world championships and that is Pro Wrestling Illustrated's, basically if it is coming off of our own unpublished opinions on the internet, it's original research. TonyFreakinAlmeida 23:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand Supermike 33:60, 04 November 2007

Citation Needed

If we don't have a reference for stings retirement, it then equals it isn’t going to happen stop adding to this article with non-referenced material Adrian90 (talk) 01:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Adrian90[reply]

removal

i read the line It is reported that Sting will return at Lockdown 2008. and found this not to have a source so i have removed it if you can provide a right source please then i or some one will re add it thank you very much i'm not saying this is fake but it is kinda telling the future —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devil Thunderbolt (talk • contribs) 23:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

repeat

Sting is a 9 time World Heavyweight Champion, holding the titles from National Wrestling Alliance, World Championship Wrestling, and Total Nonstop Action Wrestling. By Pro Wrestling Illustrated classifications, he is one of only three active former World Heavyweight Champions (along with Abyss and Samoa Joe) who have never appeared for World Wrestling Federation/Entertainment.

He is the most popular and successful American professional wrestler to have never performed under contract for WWE, and is generally considered to be one of the greatest professional wrestlers of all time.[2]

Why writing 2 times the same things.

It's actually not the same..

RandySavageFTW (talk) 18:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed 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

Resolved

I think this should be changed to Steve Borden because since we are placing names next to their ring name and not linking the ring name it would be easier to write in a link.--WillC 06:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support to remove quantifier. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, taking a few more seconds to link his article is better than contradicting WP:COMMONNAME. Also, it doesn't need to be "Sting ([[Steve Borden]])," it can just be "Sting ([[Steve Borden]])." Redirects don't even need to be avoided... per WP:R2D. RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Gavyn 13 62^talk 04:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Gavyn. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Gavyn

This is stupid... Everyone's ignoring a rule (WP:COMMONNAME) because they're too lazy to write Sting (wrestler) before his real name (which isn't even needed anyway). RandySavageFTW (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We don't always have to go by Commonname.--WillC 17:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the rule that says names aren't allowed to have brackets? RandySavageFTW (talk) 21:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. There isn't one. RandySavageFTW (talk) 15:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Gavvyn. D.M.N. (talk) 15:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done D.M.N. (talk) 11:25, 4 September 2008 (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.

He took off his glasses

I am 99% sure this is the first time his full face was televised, this is monumental. We need to put this info in the article, it happened about 30 seconds ago. Altenhofen (talk) 01:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's happened before. One of the videos from WCW had his unpainted face, and when he first came back to TNA in 2006 he showed up at a PPV in street clothes and I remember the promo leading up to that where he told the guy "tell Jeff Sting isn't coming to the PPV, Steve Borden is coming." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.2.120.245 (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

10 time world champ?

The lead section of the article has Sting as a 10 time world champion. But looking at his title history, he's got:

1 NWA World Heavyweight Championship in WCW
6 WCW World Heavyweight Championships in WCW
2 NWA/TNA World Heavyweight Championships in TNA

That makes 9 by my count. Of course, it could be completely irrelevant in about 45 minutes as a result of Bound for Glory, but we should establish the number of times he's actually been a world champion. Dooms Day 02:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you count the WCW International World Heavyweight Championship then he is a 10 time since that was a world title at one point, I believe.--WillC 02:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Tricky, tricky. Cool, thanks. Dooms Day 02:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have a source to establish the WCW IWHC as a world title? There seems to be some issue over whether or not it is. Dooms Day 22:36, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you can add another one shortly. On TNA (5th may) he claimed if he was pinned at sacrifice, 'it would be last time you see sting wrestle' So either he is going to win it again, loose and have a name change (not likely) or loose and leave. But according to http://www.therealsting.com/calendar.php (his personal website) he is booked for : Sunday, June 17 8 PM EST / 5 PM PST Television Pay-Per-View TNA - Slammiversary

Sunday, July 15 8 PM EST / 5 PM PST Television Pay-Per-View TNA - Victory Road So the loosing and leaving option is also unlikely... Grelnar (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean anything. Only the person who gets pinned or forced to submit sacrifices something. So if Foley were to pin Angle, Angle would lose his spot as leader of the MEM but Sting would not have to retire. So Sting can lose the match and not have to retire (since there will technically be 3 losers in the match, but only the one that gets pinned or submits gets penalized). TJ Spyke 16:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse Snap DDT?

I've noticed over the past while that someone changed the description of the Scorpion Death Drop to a Reverse Snap DDT, though it was changed back to a regular reverse DDT afterward. However, every time I've seen Sting doing the SDD, it's definitely looked like a Reverse Snap as opposed to just a regular reverse DDT. Why not have it listed as a Reverse Snap DDT? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.65.127 (talk) 18:03, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heel/Tweener

Is heel or tweener because he is going to team up with kevin nash who is heel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.147.102 (talk) 06:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why Steve Borden?

Why was it moved to Sting's real name? I see the discussion on it but nobody in support of the move gave any reasons why.

Unless you're Vampiro there's really no reason to call him "Steve Borden". It makes as much sense as an encyclopedia entry about this being titled "Cherilyn Sarkisian".

If it's part of a trend of taking out the (wrestler) quantifier, that's kinda weird...it makes for too big of a gap between people with (Undertaker, Montel Vontavious Porter, AJ Styles) and without (Kane, Edge, Homicide) ambiguous ring names, when there really shouldn't be one because they're ALL pro wrestlers. Basically, if this guy can be referred to by his best known ring name, why can't Sting? Ma-Mutt (talk) 21:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually a rule for quantifiers - Wikipedia:NCP#Qualifier between bracketing parenthesess.

Okay...let me put it this way. We have Sting (musician) instead of "Gordon Sumner". "Sting (wrestler)" instead of Steve Borden would be no worse, especially when nobody's gonna be searching for "Steve Borden". I figure this is one of those cases where we should [1], you know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ma-Mutt (talk • contribs) 03:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Main Event Mafia

They have their own logo, theme music, and banner hanging in the impact! Zone. It seems pretty obvious to me that they are a mainstay. 65.43.96.3 (talk) 20:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MEM Sting Image

This page lacks an image of Sting in his MEM attire. It is notable, as every other picture shows him with face paint on. I am of simple stock and do not know about fair use and rationals for inclusion or anything Wikipediaey, but I think either of these would be fine next to the MEM stub, with the nearby picture moved upwards a paragraph or two.

http://tnawrestlingphotos.com/impact-photos/2008-photos/november/image/650/IMG_9795.jpg

http://tnawrestlingphotos.com/impact-photos/2008-photos/november/image/650/IMG_8285.jpg

So hopefully someone with more knowledge in these areas can help with this. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.214.207 (talk) 02:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TNA Wrestling.com images are too high in resolution to fall under fair use.--WillC 08:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well why don't we downsample them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.214.207 (talk) 14:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If one can be made that meets the fair use guidelines then I guess it can be used, though a free use image is preferred.--WillC 14:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2006-2008 Section

Okay, just a suggestion, but maybe the 2006-2008 section is a little too long? I mean, just to keep it all balanced. It just seems a little unnecessary, when compared to his other eras, in which enough happened to make it just as long as the 2006-2008 era. But, it's just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BiggunSid (talk • contribs) 01:19, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:Starrcade-1990-Sting.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --12:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Face Turn

He turned face by quitting the MEM and fueding with angle! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrpengo88 (talk • contribs) 05:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He didn't quit MEM. So far a feud with Angle doesn't kick you out. There is just dissension among the group.--WillC 05:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, this is not the first time 2 members have feuded while still part of the group. The first example I can think of is when Randy Savage and Hulk Hogan feuded while they were both heels and members of the nWo. Sting never said he was quitting the MEM. TJ Spyke

I guess, but he is definetley more face than heel, as this fued is the top one in tna. User:Mrpengo88 —Preceding undated comment was added on 18:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, he is basically a tweener right now. TJ Spyke 19:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On iMPACT! everybody was cheering for him on the outside, and he isin't using any heel gimmicks, plus now it looks like the Main Event Mafia is gone.216.113.193.137 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

The Main Event Mafia is not gone (what show have you been watching?), and Sting is still part of the group officially. He is starting to turn face again though. TJ Spyke 23:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about him ISIN'T Face? Mrpengo88 (talk) 23:41, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction in naming

The opening sentence says that he's "better known by his ring name Sting," and yet the article was moved to "Steve Borden." I agree with those who've stated that there was hardly any reasoning given for why WP:COMMONNAME should be ignored here.

The fact that "Sting (wrestler)" irks a few people who don't like the look of it should not be the primary reason for deciding the article's name. That was the search that led me here, BTW. Also, if the most commonly known names for other wrestlers aren't article titles followed by parentheticals, then perhaps they should be. -- James26 (talk) 03:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]