Jump to content

Talk:Bound for Glory (2005)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Timing

[edit]

As I did first with TNA Slammiversary 2005, I took the time to go through the DVD and get accurate timings for all match decisions, using the DVD player's timer (I use Cyberlink PowerDVD 7.0). The following is a running diagram. The preshow match is based on the timing for the Preshow feature title. The others are based on the timing for the DVD's main title. Matches are timed from the opening bell to the final bell. Multiple-fall matches have mid-term falls counted at the strike of three.

ALL ON ONE DVD TITLE

0:03.02 X-Division 4-way: Shelley vs. Strong vs. Aries vs. Dutt 0:15.35 Sonjay Dutt wins (pinning Roderick Strong, Dragon Rana, 12.33)

0:34.58 Samoa Joe vs. Jushin Thunder Liger 0:42.15 Samoa Joe wins (submission, Coquina Clutch, 7.17)

0:47.10 Six-Man Tag: The Diamonds in the Rough vs. Apolo, Sonny Siaki and Shark Boy 0:54.17 The Diamonds in the Rough win (David Young pinning Sonny Siaki, Spinebuster, 7.07)

1:02.32 Lance Hoyt vs. "The Alpha Male" Monty Brown 1:09.05 Monty Brown wins (pinfall, Pounce, 6.33)

1:14.33 Six-Man Tag: Team Canada (A-1, Bobby Roode and Eric Young) vs. 3Live Kru 1:20.33 Team Canada wins (Eric Young pinning B.G. James, hockey stick shot, 6.00)

1:26.34 Ultimate X8: Petey Williams vs. Matt Bentley vs. Chris Sabin 1:40.12 Petey Williams wins (13.38)

1:45.44 NWA Tag Titles: AMW (Harris and Storm) (c) vs. The Naturals (Stevens and Douglas) 1:56.23 AMW wins (Harris pinning Stevens, Death Sentence, 10.39)

2:04.58 Monster's Ball: Rhino vs. Abyss vs. Sabu vs. Jeff Hardy 2:16.45 Rhino wins (pinning Jeff Hardy, Super Rhino Driver, 11.47)

2:23.06 Iron Man for the X Title: Christopher Daniels vs. A.J. Styles (c) 2:53.04 A.J. Styles pins (Styles Clash, 29.58)

2:58.37 Ten-Man Gauntlet for the Gold 3:12.57 Rhino wins (14.20)

3:15.44 Rhino vs. Jeff Jarrett (w/Gail Kim) (c) (Tito Ortiz, special guest referee) (no opening bell, Jarrett's attack began at time given) 3:21.28 Rhino wins (pinfall, gore, 6.44)

Requested moves

[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 restore previous page titles. As noted, the parent article uses the prefix, and there are many articles called "Bound for Glory" with which to disambiguate; the prefix aids in this as much as the parenthetical does. There isn't consensus for the removal of the prefix, so I have restored the stable page names. Dekimasuよ! 14:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
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.

About the Requested Moves issue

[edit]

I think that this is the right decision. I support that the WWE Big Four PPV's were without the WWE prefix, and the other WWE PPV's have the WWE/F prefix. Also, I support putting the initial of the promotions as a prefix before the name of a PPV or event. Not only TNA, or ROH, or any promotion in the world. The move made with the TNA Lockdown and TNA Bound for Glory were totally arbitrary. The best decision was made in this issue. Xbox6 00:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about a reason WHY you support the big 4 not having a prefix? No one has given a reason for that yet. Mshake3 01:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's no disambig for WrestleMania, SummerSlam, Survivor Series, or Royal Rumble. That's why there's no prefix for it.
As for the three mayor TNA pay-per-views, well... first of all, there's no disambig for Slammiversary, so you don't have to worry about that. For BFG, there are many terms "Bound for Glory" to disambiguate. For a new person looking at Wikipedia, they might be confused with the term "Bound for Glory (2007)" alone; they might take it as something related to the band, the book, or the film (possibly a film remake (released in 2007, not that there's going to be one), in which it would be redirected from "Bound for Glory (2007)" or something). "TNA" as the prefix will set set up the basis of the article (see WWE New Year's Revolution; there no disambig for it, but there's a WWE prefix in it anyways). Same reason for Lockdown (although there's not really a disambig for it, the status remains the same). Anyways, now that the issues done, can you stop beating the dead horse? MITB LS 02:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your opinion. But I wasn't asking for it. Xbox6 appears to say that ALL PPV articles, save for WWEs major events, should have it. I want that opinion on those comments. Mshake3 02:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Might I add that film remakes generally use a "(year) film" text at the end of the article title. Mshake3 02:42, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but think about the redirects. See Dawn of the Dead (2004), which redirects to Dawn of the Dead (2004 film). Anyway, this issue is done. END OF STORY. MITB LS 03:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easy there buddy. Wouldn't want you to blow a gasket or whatever. I'd still like a clarificaration on Xbox's comments. Because he doesn't agree with the current setup for Slammiversary. Besides, taking about a dead horse, didn't you make the formal move request? And it's not like this thing got many votes. It closed due to No Consus, and I wanted a clarification on an opinion. Now if that's beating a dead horse, well then we've all killed many over the years. Peace! Mshake3 15:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. First of all, I do agree with you that Xbox shouldn't have moved it. That's a given, as there's no disambig for the term "Slammiversary". As for my nomination, I had to do so to try to reach a consensus (I was neutral). If you don't feel that it wasn't fair, you can put in another request to move the page (and reach a clear consensus). MITB LS 15:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
...at least try to. MITB LS 02:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Mshake3 03:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to change it back to the old, file another request to move the pages (see WP:RM). You can set it up and try to each a clear consensus. MITB LS 15:03, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I'm find with the current setup, as long as Slammiversary stays as is. Mshake3 15:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then ALRIGHT! MITB LS 00:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Bound for Glory (2005)

Reviewer: The C of E (talk · contribs) 21:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC) It is reasonably well written.[reply]

  1. a (prose): 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):
  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:


As a wrestling fan, I am always happy to give this a review. My first thoughts are that it is looking good however I feel there are a ew changes needed before it can be a GA.

Nice to see. I'm the only one around here who expands the TNA articles. I've been wanting to get to this one for a long time.--WillC 09:22, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to call Jarrett the "then champion" in the lead, better context to just refer to him as the champion. Same with Styles later in the lead
    • I do it to give a timeframe, but removed.
  • On the Nash medical sentence, you've double comma-ed "however"
    • Fixed
  • "Styles defeated Daniels one-to-zero". one to zero what? Falls?
    • Added falls.
  • In background, you should have all the info about the fanfest together instead of breaking it up with the ticket info
    • Fixed
  • "Several TNA wrestlers were slatted to appear at the event," Don't think I need to say what's wrong with that.
    • Fixed, hopefully.
  • check the spacing on the wrestlers listed
    • Crap, result of moving it from subpage. These random deletion of spaces.
  • Team Canada should have it's members listed in the background (And removed from the preliminary section). I know who was in it because I watched a lot of TNA at the time but someone who doesn't know much about wrestling in that time probably wouldn't know.
    • I was afraid to do that since the source only says Team Canada and not what members of it. I added the wrestlers. Not sure if D'Amore was there.
  • the "slatted" spelling mistake also occurs later in the paragraph
    • Fixed, I don't like the word that much anyway, just removed.
  • No need to link Lisowski in the background when he is linked earlier in the lead. The same applies to all linked names
    • I've learned that the lead and the body are not subject to the overlinking rule exactly. If it is mentioned in the lead it should be linked in the body again. Once it is linked in the body the overlinking takes over. At least that is what I've been told through FA.
  • No need to list AMW's members in storylines when you've already done that in the lead
    • Above
  • link for BG James?
    • Background, among the fanfest members.
  • Which match did Ortiz referee at Hard Justice?
    • Added
  • "Undisclosed reason"? Surely in context of kayfabe it should be unknown
    • Really nope. They randomly had an unannounced match for Unbreakable. Only thing I know of is Abyss interfered in Sabu's tag match at Sacrifice but there was no follow up. Abyss had been Raven's prior opponent at No Surrender so the interference was rubbed off. Even in several of the reviews for their matches no one knows why the storyline is going on.
  • Bit of overuse of the word signature in the Joe-Liger paragraph.
    • I use it in place of finisher. Pretty much only thing I have unless you have an idea. I am very welcome to it. I removed one of them.
  • We don't need to know about near-falls early on in the Hoyt paragraph because it didn't have any bearing on the result
    • I added it to give some meat to that match. Instead of it being direct, it has something more than the finish.
  • "after crashing into" Bit slang-y, "hit him with" would be better
    • Perhaps "after tackling with" or "after slamming into him with the". The Pounce is a shoulder block. Brown hit him with his body.
  • Is mentioning Williams doing the "O Canada nut squash" really necessary?
    • Not really. I added that before adding the match screw ups. Was trying to find noteworthy stuff. Removed.
  • Since you already clarified in the lead that America's most wanted was AMW, no need to keep doing it throughout the article. Use AMW after the first mention.
    • I was wondering, I wasn't sure something would continually remember what it stood for throughout.
  • In the Monsters ball paragraph, is there a source that says they were to be without food and water? also get rid of the and/or.
    • The review should cover that. Tenay goes over it before they come to the ring. I'll back it up with the DVD cite.
  • "Close to the end of the contest, Hardy ascended to the top of TNA's entrance ramp above a sign and jumped off in a somersault towards a prone Abyss, who was laying on a table." Needs rewording.
    • Any better?
  • In the Styles-daniels paragraph, again no need to talk about near submissions when they don't affect the result
    • Helps to show they were trying to gain falls in the match, considering the rules.
  • Team 3D's members are already listed earlier, no need to list them again
    • Done
  • Link for Pro Wrestling Torch Newsletter?
    • Redirects to Wade Keller, not sure if that is needed. Done though.
  • The Keller paragraph does seem very jumbled. maybe just focus on the main matches and the highest scored one instead of listing his remarks and grades for every match
    • Removed star ratings. Enough in first two paragraphs.
  • Source 36, Is it TNA (which doesn't need to be linked after the first mention) or wrestleview that is the publisher?
    • The work is by TNA, a press release. WrestleView is re-publishing it.
  • No need to link Canadian Online Explorer after the first mention
    • If you are talking about the refs, as far as I remember the refs are exceptions to the overlink rule.
  • No need for bibliography in the sources section when you've only used it once in source 33
    • I cite to BFG 05 in 33, while the bib is to Genesis.

If you can sort these out, I'll take another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review.--WillC 09:22, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All the fixes are fine, except for the Brown/Hoyt one. I would say that tackling him would be a better fit. If you can change that, I'll pass it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:46, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All done.--WillC 01:45, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We have a new GA. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:33, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bound for Glory (2005). 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:05, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bound_for_Glory_(2005)&oldid=1228906065"