Talk:TNA Impact!'s move to Monday nights

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... it's a WP:MIRROR! The material in this article was taken from Monday Night Wars. This diff from March 31, 2010 contains the entries in question. The wordpress entry was published on May 3. They stole from us, we're not stealing from them. --LM2000 (talk) 08:30, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, there's no attribution in the page history of this page to show it was moved internally from another article which would have given us the links we needed to confirm that it was here first much quicker. I've tagged the page accordingly. Amortias (T)(C) 10:43, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:TNA Impact!'s move to Monday nights/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 16:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article over the course of the next couple of days. Please see below:

Immediate Fails

• It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria. - Not really. Arguable, the article should be a B before a GA nomination, but the article looks presentable from afar.
• It contains copyright infringements. - As discussed on article - [1] was likely copied from the Wikipedia version.
• 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}}). - No Tags in article
• It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. - No evidence of warring on page. Despite above PROD.

Links

• There are two Superlucha references that don't mention that they are written in Spanish. [2] - EDIT - They do mention this, but not on the title of the link.
  • Fixed.

Prose

Lede

• "In early 2010, professional wrestling promotion..." - Should this read In January or March 2010? I realise this happened over a period of five months, but it started in January, or March.
  • Done.
• "This put them in direct competition with World Wrestling Entertainment..." - Perhaps "Impact! would be in direct competition", or "TNA would be", or state that TNA did this intentionally.
• "Nitro went head-to-head with Raw in a battle for Nielsen ratings each week..." - wording - maybe higher Nielsen ratings, otherwise it could be construed as if they were battling over all of the ratings, which is ambiguous.
  • Done
• "this led Impact!'s move to sometimes be called The New Monday Night Wars..." - Wording - "This led impact's move to be called by some "The New Monday Night Wars". Regardless of wording, it should be a quote.
  • Done

Background and first Monday Impact!

• On October 27, 2009, Hulk Hogan announced that he and Eric Bischoff had signed with Total Nonstop Action Wrestling (TNA) in a press conference held at Madison Square Garden, the place considered to be the home of World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) - No citation that this is true. I know it is true, but I'd want a citation that it was considered the home of WWE.
  • Couldn't find a source so I just removed the bit about MSG being WWE's home. If it were important some RS would've mentioned it.#
    • Completely agree. If it were important, you'd think someone would talk about it.
• "Hogan announced during The Ultimate Fighter: Heavyweights Finale on December 5 that Impact!, which normally aired on Thursdays, would go head to head with WWE Raw on Monday January 4 in a three-hour live broadcast." - Is this worth mentioning that the UFC show was also on Spike? It's important what network these shows were on.
  • Done
• The January 4 show would be the first time since Nitro's last episode in March 2001 that two wrestling promotions would go head-to-head in a Monday night ratings competition.[12] - Arguably not true. Should add in the word major wrestling promotions, as there could be minor league wrestling promotions doing the same.
  • Done.
• Scott Hall, Sean Waltman, Sting, Jeff Jarrett & Ric Flair" are all not wikilinked in the text. Any reason for this?
  • No reason, it's fixed now.

Move to Mondays

• "Ratings for Impact! had improved slightly over the last week as they offered a Career vs. Career match between" wording - Not sure offered is the correct word here. Maybe promoted, or similar.
  • removed every use of the word "offered"
• Wikilink Ladder match
  • Done
• "After better ratings for the April 5 episode of Impact!, TNA decided to start Impact! one hour earlier permanently" - Is it worth mentioning what time it was being broadcast?
  • Done

Reception and legacy

• In a later interview, he said he had no positive memories about his time in TNA - This needs to be quoted.
  • Done.
• In the tenth anniversary reprint of RD Reynolds and Brian Alvarez's Death of WCW, the authors write that TNA did not have the audience that WCW did when they moved to initiate the Monday Night Wars, pointing out that WCW Saturday Night typically did better than WWE shows did in the weekend timeslots. Reynolds and Alvarez also wrote that TNA did not have the financial resources that WCW did and that WWE was not "asleep at the wheel" as they were in 1995. - Context. Should state that the two were surmising between the two different wars.
  • Done

Review

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):

   See above

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Information is well sourced.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article covers a lot of the major aspects of the war, including reception and legacy, as well as ratings.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Article passes a WP:NPOV check.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No Evidence of Edit wars

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):

   Uses free images.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

@LM2000: - could you take a look at the above regarding the article. The review is now currently on hold. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:28, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@LM2000: - The article seems pretty close to where I would pass it, but there is still a few bits that need addressing. See below

• "This put them in direct competition with World Wrestling Entertainment..." - Perhaps "Impact! would be in direct competition", or "TNA would be", or state that TNA did this intentionally.

• The viewership ratings table has an asterix in just in the top row. Is this traditional?

• TNA President Dixie Carter stated that while the network - Should this mention that Spike were the network in question, considering TNA is broadcast on lots of networks.

• The Monday night Impact! featured the debuts and returns of Scott Hall, Sean Waltman, Eric Bischoff, The Nasty Boys, Sting, Jeff Jarrett, Jeff Hardy, Ric Flair, Sean Morley, Orlando Jordan, Shannon Moore and Bubba the Love Sponge in addition to Hogan. - Should this be split into those that were debuting, and those who were returning?

• The ratings showed that, much like the original Monday Night Wars, Raw came out on top - Wording. this suggests RAW were never behind in the original monday night wars.

• For the year of 2010, Impact! ratings dropped seven percent from 2009 - Should this mention from where to where?
  • All done. The January 4 rating was the number of viewers in millions, not the Nielsen rating. I put the Nielsen number in.LM2000 (talk) 11:55, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

Congratulations. The article has now passed it's WP:GA review. However, this does not mean that the article cannot be improved, or edited, even if the article is not going to be promoted to WP:FA status! Feel free to leave constructive feedback for my GA review on my talk page.