Talk:WrestleMania 22

Main Event, part 2

Shouldn't the Angle/Orton/Mysterio match be listed as the overall main event? Cena/Triple H is just the RAW main event. 68.47.234.131 04:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Cena getting booed isn't POV. The commentators, fans, WWE.com, and Cena himself all talked about it.

It's not notable though for a PPV RESULTS section. Also, out your comments at the bottom, not the top or middle of a section. TJ Spyke 04:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I definatly agree with you, man. The true main event for Wrestlemania, and the last match of the show, is the Royal Rumble winner's title shot (therefore being the triple threat match). Jman5 06:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The order of matches is the exact order of WWE.com. Perry 17:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Fine, although WWE.com does scramble their matches around, frequently. The last match will be the triple threat. Jman5 07:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't be too sure of that. Lord knows Triple H would love nothing more than for WrestleMania to go off the air with the last image being him holding his new title high in the air... and he'll talk to Daddy to make sure it happens. Besides, Smackdown is typically the B-show anyway, so they'll probably make that one of the later matches, but not the final main event. Why do you think the Raw main event is advertised on top? HHH wouldn't have it any other way. Anthony Hit me up... 11:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The match that ended Wrestlemania XIX, was the B-Show title match. So don't be so sure that, that will be the case. And another thing, HHH is not always looking for the spotlight, he jobbed the last two manias. He also went on a 3 month hiatus to let the younger guys get over, and jobbed from Wrestlemania 21 all the way to Taboo Tuesday 2005. Jman5 22:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The fact remains that HHH is the biggest star that the WWE have, and WWE are trying to push John Cena to that level (even though it clearly isn't working for obvious reasons) - WWE maybe hope that the WM match will put Cena over even further with the fans (even if he loses to Hunter).. and so that's why this math should be the last on the card - the MAIN main event, no matter what typical IWC geek morons say about HHH and his 'politics'. As good as Angle is, his opponents, Orton and Mysterio aren't at the level of Cena yet...

And I quote the above user, "Orton and Mysterio aren't at the level of Cena yet." That is without a shadow of a doubt the dumbest Wrestling-related comment EVER made. Now I'm not gonna type every little thing that makes Orton/Mysterio better than Cena, because that would take months to type and weeks to read. Perry 03:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

That statement about Rey and Orton not being at the level of Cena is so true...they are leagues above John Cena and anything he could do in the ring at this point. I think the WWE just listed the matches in the order of importance as they see it from greatest to smallest...which goes to show what they think of certain superstars and/or brands. 71.29.36.55 06:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

And I quote Perry, "And I quote the above user, 'Orton and Mysterio aren't at the level of Cena yet.' That is without a shadow of a doubt the dumbest Wrestling-related comment EVER made. H-yuck!"

You are a typical member of the IWC - the type that thinks that WWE should revolve around the likes of Chris Benoit, "because they're real wrestlers H-Yuck!" I said that Orton and Mysterio aren't at the level of Cena IN TERMS OF MAIN EVENT STATUS. JOHN CENA IS BEING PUSHED AS THE NUMBER ONE FACE ON RAW. Mysterio and Orton haven't quite been solidified as main event players as WWE have pushed Cena as. And if you don't understand that, you don't understand sports entertainment very much. Go back to your TNA wrestling. Oh, and before you call me a Cena mark, I probably hate John Cena more than you do. I wish he would just go away. I said what I said because it's how it is, not how I want it to be.

I'm not sticking up for Perry here but the reason why Orton and Mysterio aren't seen as main eventers yet is because WWE hasn't really given them a chance to firmly run with the ball. I mean take a look at Randy Orton, he had a run as (WWE) World Heavyweight Champion that barely even lasted a month. Now who did he beat for the Championship? He defeated Chris Benoit, a man who after winning arguably the most important match in his professional wrestling career was regulated to 2nd class citizenship as World Champion behind the on-going feud that Triple H had with Shawn Michaels, or anything involving Triple H in general during his reign. Even more so, he was given opponents that even the casual fan saw as a minor threat to Benoit, like Kane. He may have been a monster when he debuted for the then WWF over 7 years ago, but no one takes him seriously as a main eventer or WWE/World Championship contender today. Randy Orton could have had a chance to be something special or do something special and really earn that main event status when he was World Heavyweight Champion (that's the purpose of a championship like that, to elevate a wrestler's stance/position within a wrestling company) but instead WWE decided to cut his legs out from under him and stop any momentum he had going. It's taken him this long to be considered as a legit challenger for any premier championship and I'm not sure how many people out there that watch WWE programming consider him a front-runner to win the World Heavyweight Championship at WrestleMania. Rey Mysterio is one of a kind, no doubt about it, however WWE (in my opinion) doesn't know how to push Rey or are afraid of pushing him to maximum potential because he is the opposite of everything that WWE see their main-event wrestlers (meaning big, tall, muscular, larger than life athletes...almost superhuman, if you will). I'm not saying Rey should have been main eventing WWE Pay-Per-Views all along or that he should be WWE/World Heavyweight Champion but Rey is one of those special wrestlers that when you look at him, you can say "hey, I believe he can main event a pay-per-view" or "hey, I believe Rey will beat Kurt Angle and Randy Orton for the World Heavyweight Championship" but WWE really hasn't given Rey a chance to establish that. The only thing going in Rey's favor right now is that (presumably) WWE doesn't see him as a Crusierweight (but it doesn't stop them from dipping him back in that division every now and again) so he gets some limited opportunities with what he's given. If WWE had put just the slightest effort in pushing Rey Mysterio as a true main eventer (without using the Eddie Guerrero factor) Rey could be seen as a main eventer. That doesn't mean he needs to beat every main eventer on SmackDown but if he were to be given more credible feuds in the past, they wouldn't need to exploit the death of Eddie Guerrero to put Rey in the main event of WrestleMania. Main event status of professional wrestlers (or sports entertainers) in the WWE simply perception. That means whomever WWE sees as a main-eventer will be pushed as a main eventer no matter what, don't believe me well take a look at Batista. In 2004 Batista was no where near main event status (he was barely midcard status as an Evolution flunkie) but something within the WWE made them think that Batista could be a main eventer and slowly (but surely) they did with Batista and it worked. Same thing with Cena...WWE saw Cena as a future main eventer...but took the opposite route with him, which is why so many fans resent him and his push as main eventer. In my opinion, Cena should be upper mid card (who dabs in the main event spot light every now and gain) at this point of his career, not full-fledged main eventer. He needs more polishing (and few more moves) under his belt before he's at that level. Sure he's charismatic but that can only get you so far with the fans (even if you are under the gun of the WWE hype machine) before fans start to revolt...which is what is happening to Cena. It has been proven, no true main eventer in the WWE can get by on charisma alone (Cena) or wrestling ability alone (Benoit)...but that a combination of the two (i.e. Edge - who should be in this years WrestleMania main event, Triple H, Angle, Michaels) is the key to being a true main-eventer in the eyes of the fans. Off the top of my head, there's only a handful of wrestlers that I can think of that can get over as main eventers using one extreme or the other, and those wrestlers include The Rock, Hulk Hogan from the charismatic stand point and Bret Hart from the wrestling stand point. However, this my own opinion on the situation at hand. 71.29.36.55 22:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Like you said, that was just YOUR OPINION, yes. and I agree with some of what you have to say. I hate the fact that the MAJORITY (yes, majority) of the IWC treat their own OPINIONS as facts - they tell the world how Vince is killing the WWE just because (THEY THINK) there should be more 'rassling.. h-yuck... on RAW and Smackdown... this is despite evidence that the average TV viewer doesn#t care too much about pure wrestling and wants storylines and talking. It's the same people that think JBL killed Smackdown, that HHH 'really' runs the show backstage and that Chris Benoit is the WWE's saviour (even though ratings dropped when he was champ)... The IWC are not worth listening to... HHH, JBL, Edge and Vince are right about them... Matt 29/3/06

Cena getting booed isn't POV. The commentators, fans, WWE.com, and Cena himself all talked about it.

It's not notable though for a PPV RESULTS section. Also, out your comments at the bottom, not the top or middle of a section. TJ Spyke 04:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow what a Wrestlemania were going to have

This is going to be better then last year Wresltemania so many good matches this year

and omg what about the playboy fight wow so into this Wrestlemnia 22

It'll be ok, but I doubt it will be better than last years. It sure as hell will be a lot better than IX though.-3bulletproof16 19:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you being sarcastic about that Playboy pillow fight? Please say yes.. that match isn't worthy of being on Heat, let alone WM...

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but in my opinion this year's WM will be better than lasts'. Perry 18:26, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

This user can't spell, he brings up stupid topics, and he does not sign his name. He can't get anything right. This wrestlemania will not be as good as last year, the card on paper does not match last year's standards. Jman5 23:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Does it really matter that the match will be a terrible wrestling display? Personally i will be looking at two good looking divas.

Trivia Notes

Please note, whoever reads this, that Bobby Lashley is indeed in the MITB Ladder Match and Booker vs. Boogeyman will now be Booker & Sharmell vs. Boogeyman, but SmackDown has not aired yet, so don't add Lashley or Sharmell to the trivia section and say that it will be his debut at Wrestlemania until after SmackDown airs this week. -Adamaniac 16:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

--HEY THANKS FOR RUINING SMACKDOWN FOR ME... (added: and yet still after you read this comment you added another spoiler to yours!!!! You're just as bad, if not worse than those trolls that add spoilers to the main pages - oh and go ahead and give me another warning for flaming... I know personally that I am not in the wrong here) Matt - 21-22 March 2006.

Just because you might be "in the right" does not give you the right to personally attack or flame someone. Eenu (talk) 19:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I've added a piece of trivia about the diffrent logos for WrestleMania 22. I thought it would be a nice piece of interesting info as this usually doesn't happen. --3bulletproof16 17:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

71.29.36.55 22:53, 28 March 2006 (UTC) "At 165 pounds Rey Mysterio is, pound for pound, the smallest (and shortest) person to ever compete in a main event match at WrestleMania." Perhaps this, or some variant could be placed in the trivia/facts section of the WrestleMania article...I think it has some merit...I just won't add it.

WrestleMania 21 Battle Royal - Official Match?

Why is there a war raging over adding/removing Chris Masters from the list of people making competitive WreslteMania debuts? A DVD battle royal DOES NOT COUNT. If Heat/DVD matches counted, then the world tag titles were defended in a standard match at WM XIX, making the note about it being the first since WM XV incorrect.

A DVD match does count since it takes place at? WrestleMania. Heat matches don't count because it's takes place on? HEAT. Perry 02:56, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

When I watched WrestleMania 21 on PPV last year, I don't recall seeing Chris Masters wrestle on PPV. Therefore, WrestleMania 22 is his debut. Hell let's just go change the WrestleMania IX page to say Owen Hart vs. Papa Shango is an official WrestleMania match or the SummerSlam 92 page to say El Matador vs Papa Shango happened. Yes, I understand your point and I'm being rather facetious with my last two statements, but the bottom line is that as far as history is concerned, the WM21 battle royal was a dark match that just happens to be on the DVD as an extra match.

Nevertheless a match that took place at WrestleMania. To say debut is to say his first time at WrestleMania which is not true. Now you can say it is his televised WrestleMania debut. Perry 03:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, sounds like a good compromise - DrVenkman

Indeed. We should in future distinguish between "competed" at WrestleMania and "televised" on WrestleMania, since there have been a lot of WM matches overs years which didn't make it to TV, just like dark matches at Raw or a Smackdown taping. BronzeWarrior 23:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Spoilers

I believe that wrestling involving taped shows should be treated the same as movies and spoiler warnings should be posted. The changes to the wrestlemania card involving the smackdown tapings from 3/20 should either have not been posted yet or spoiler warnings should be put up.Vinnyxvincent 10:54, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, it's Wikipedia's policy to not spoil WWE taped events. If you notice spoilers, be bold and remove them. Eenu (talk) 19:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Layout

Why must you guys insist on having the entire match card in big bold letters? It makes the page look so ugly and un-encyclopedia like. Also, what's the deal with the Money in the Bank match? We don't need RAW or Smackdown after every single superstar. I try to clean things up, but then someone goes and messes everything back up. >:-( OutRider2003 22:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

This format is standard among all WrestleMania articles (look at the previous 20). We do need RAW/SD after each wrestler to know which side they are on (some may forget when reading this article years from now. So it is not messed up as you say it is. Perry 00:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

No. You do not need those grotesque section headers until you have something to say under each of them. That is what the articles have, and this one is just absolutely terrible the way you insist on reverting it to. So for now, can we try a bulleted list until there is a paragraph or so to actually say? -Splash^talk 02:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do you care how the page is edited? It conforms to the standard of the other pages, which should be the only criteria - consistancy. If you want to change this to a bulleted list you should be prepared to change the other 21 pages as well. BronzeWarrior 23:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Money in the Bank

Do not remove Lashley from the Ladder match. Canada gets SmackDown on Thursday, and it has been confirmed that Lashley is in the match. --Killswitch Engage 02:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Sadly it has to air in the US before it gets added. It's Wikipedia's rule and WWE.com also waits until it airs in the US before adding results. So just wait 'til tomorrow. Perry 03:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, what perry said. If many of not seen it, do not spoil it for them, no matter how obvious the result of the outcome is. Jman5 04:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

K that is stupid. Its not my fault that Canada gets it before the U.S. Don't get pissed when i say i tod you so. Oh and if you dont know where Canada is, it's north of the states. Just a note. --Killswitch Engage 22:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Listen, just because it happened it Canada does not mean the whole world saw it. That is spoiling for other people, if you think that is ok, there is something wrong with you, so stop your bitching, little kid! Jman5 22:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Australia also gets Smackdown a day earlier than the states as do most of the world.

Hey "jman" it may just surprise you to know that im not a little kid!! Just because you got your panties in a bunch doesn't mean you need to go off on me. It may shock you that Alberta Canada law states that I can obtain my learners permit. That means I can drive if you don't know. I think that legitimetly states im no longer a "little kid". --Killswitch Engage 03:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Unforunately, "Killswitch Engage", both Perry and Jman are right due to the fact that it's Wikipedia's rule and also the fact that it happened doesn't mean that the world has seen it. Adamaniac 07:27, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I know this is way late but here in Upstate New York, the St. Lawrence Valley area, we get Smackdown on Saturday Afternoon. Sometimes we don't even get it. ````

Were Will Wrestlemania 23 take place

Wrestlemania 23 rmuors say its going to take place in Deriort were superbowl 40 was

71.29.36.55 14:29, 24 March 2006 (UTC) I don't know where it will take place, but I do know for certain, it will be announced during WrestleMania 22, it's tradition. Maybe we could add that to the encyclopedic article for WrestleMania 22 since we know it's bound to happen. Then again, that may be breaking kayfabe...something I don't want to do, especially if it will bother others.

The person, who brought this up his a complete retard, it is "rumors" and "Detroit" and "where". Go back to 4th grade, so you can spell properly. And no one cares where and when the hell wm23 will take place, as of now. It is in a goddamn year, no one is thinking is thinking about it right now. Jman5 22:54, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

:::Actually, the IWC think about it and care sooo much because they like to think they're better than normal wrestling fans, wanting to know about every little thing before it happens - somewhere in their minds they probably think they're a part of the wrestling industry because they have this 'knowledge'... Matt

Bitching about the IWC on the internet is like a boxer complaining his sport is too violent. BronzeWarrior 09:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually I have distanced myself from the newsboards and forums because those morons were doing my head in. The 'IWC' doesn't include wrestling fans who post FACTS in the wrestling section of an internet encyclopedia. It is where all the "real 'rassling" loving internet geeks congregate on stupid little forums to whine to each other about how bad RAW and Smackdown are going to be next week because Mr McMahon's assistant's brother-in-law's cousin's next-door neighbour posted on some kid's website what he heard (thinks) is going to happen... If these idiots hate the shows so much then why do they watch them week in, week out?

67.141.243.61 22:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Wow, are you one of those individuals who believes that the Internet Wrestling Community is to blame for the downward spiral of the WWE (or wrestling in general) the past few years?

I do not blame the IWC totally for the decline of professional wrestling over the past few years, however I do believe that it is partly to blame. After all, isn't professional wrestling supposed to be a illusion? And if it's no longer an illusion to a portion of fans, how can we take it seriously enough to enjoy it seeing as we know how it's done and know what's going to happen??? Matt

Perry i just wanted to konw if like everyone could make like picks of all the macthes fro Wrestlemania

hey Perry my names matt i just wanted to know if i and other people could make picks on all the matches for Wresltemania 22 and post them here would that be ok i won't do it unitl u say so thanks.

I don't know if it would be appropiate, but I mean with everyone giving their insight on the PPV on this page it wouldn't matter. Just keep it short. Perry 21:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

CA-NA-DA!!!

Someone just recently pointed out that Smackdown airs in Canada on Thursday, which I thought was a very valid point for posting updates to the WrestleMania card. I understand there may be a Wiki policy that it's only valid if it airs in the U.S. but when I lived in Eastern Michigan there were no shortage of Canadian broadcast channels on local cable; hell with a satellite dish you could pick them up anywhere in North America. So here's the deal - since the geographical line which divides Canada and the U.S. is a definition of politicians and governments and television broadcasts + satellite dishes don't recognize those lines, shouldn't "aired in Canada" be the same as "aired in the U.S." when you can just as easily see it here? Hmm? BronzeWarrior 23:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

WWE.com doesn't post results until it airs in the US. So if WWE doesn't do it then we shouldn't. Boy, Canada gets no respect. Perry 23:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Canada gets no respect, especially when they're in Canada. I remember when Christian was still there that they kept calling it BIZARRO WORLD just because the Canadian crowd was popping for him. I'm sitting there getting steadily more insulted, thinking "Maybe they pop because HE'S GOOD and they LIKE HIS WORK?" Ugh. At least JBL put over Canadian beer as being better. BronzeWarrior 09:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Bizarro world isn't intended to be an insult it's just how King puts into words the fact that while in Canada any Canadian wrestlers no matter how big of a heel they are in the US will get a huge pop and their opponents will (occassionally)not receive near as big of a pop. So by saying Bizarro world he means it is different from the normal reaction to said person (especially Shawn Michaels who is a big face in the US. Why can't Canada just let it go?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:71.122.102.164 (talk • contribs)

I believe Canada can't let it go because of the fact that Shawn was part of the biggest screwjob in WWE history. --Killswitch Engage 21:26, 1 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

It's only the biggest Screwjob in WWE History in Canada. Others have been screwed but Canadian won't let it go, and especially Bret Hart won't let it go.

67.141.243.61 23:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Wow, do you pay attention to anything? Bret Hart (in my opinion) has already let go of the "Montreal Screwjob". This is why he hasn't done anything or participated in anything that will bring more attention to that night than it deserves. It's the same reason why he accepted his induction into the WWE Hall of Fame. It's the reason why he WON'T be involved in the Vince McMahon/Shawn Michaels match (unless we end up being worked) tonight. If anything it's Vince McMahon who won't let go of Montreal and chooses to relive it at every instance he gets. Sad thing is that the "Montreal Incident" was just a drop in the hat of what was a great 15 plus year career of Bret Hart. While I don't believe he is hung up on that (having a life altering event like a stroke...can change anyone's perception about something as trivial as the "Montreal Incident) I don't think anyone would blame him if he was. I'm sure Bret has or would like to forget about it but when you have Vince McMahon (and now apparently Total Nonstop Action Wrestling) reliving or reinventing the "Montreal Incident" in one fashion or another...it kind of keeps that moment alive eventhough it's been well over 8 years since that has happened.

Well, wouldnt you not want to let it go if you were leaving WWE and you to drop the title before you left and you had the planned finish changed on you with Vince screwing you out of the title?? We are still pretty pissed and so is Bret. The anger has subsided a bit though with Bret being inducted into the Hall of Fame.--Killswitch Engage 06:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Hall of Fame

When were Perry and Atlas cofirmed for the Hall of Fame? I didnt see it on Raw. --Killswitch Engage 00:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Perry and Atlas have been confimred here. Eenu (talk) 01:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Match Capitalization

I believe that match names such as Triple Threat Match and No Holds Barred Match should be capitalized, because they are a WWE specialty match, therefore making it a proper noun. "Proper nouns (also called proper names) are the names of unique entities." (from Noun) Some people have disagreed with me, and I was wondering what everyone else thought. On the List of professional wrestling match types page, all matches are capitalized. Eenu (talk) 06:48, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Perry umm why u delete my pick u siad keep it short

so i did i need like 100 percent of your approvel that i can make picks on here just say yes or no thanks

Don't do picks. Perry 20:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Trivia Note for Money in the Bank Ladder Matches

This the Third Money In the Bank Ladder Match (Matt Hardy vs. Edge "Loser leaves RAW" Match was the 2nd)

So Shelton is the only person to compete in both WrestleMania Money in the Bank Ladder Matches but not in all Money in the Bank Ladder Matches BionicWilliam 23:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

WWE.com states this is the second-ever money in the bank ladder match. Perry 01:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

It's the second ever 6 man MITB match. Edge and Matt had one and it still counts. WWE thinks that their fans have a memory retention of about one month, so they twist truths to fit their current agenda. tv316 02:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

It's true because on WM 22 subsite it says 2nd ever money in the bank, but on Edge's video page it says "Edge wins the Loser leaves RAW, Money in the Bank Ladder Match against Matt Hardy." Perry 02:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

So???? Matt 29/3/06

guys,nobody cares.what a nitpick encyclopedia Lord revan 05:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC) At WrestleMania 23 it will be a nine man Money in the bank match Involving 3 from raw, 3 from smackdown and 3 from ecw. So get ready because it will be big. If you don't believe it believe it I'm Vince McMahon. 11:20 A.M. August 27 2006

Theme Songs

Just so it isn't edited out again, WWE.com confirms the use of music from Danko Jones and Bullets and Octane for WrestleMania 22. It's at the bottom of the WrestleMania 22 subsite section, with samples and all that stuff.

That's cool, I'm sure the info can be left in. Please remember to sign your posts though, and if you have a login account to do so with four ~ keys at the end. BronzeWarrior 09:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh man, so many theme songs! When are they gonna find the time to play all of them? Jman5 06:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

It's a four-hour show, they'll figure it out, lol. Eenu (talk) 07:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm quite sure they'll just use "Big Time" as the opening theme, "I Dare You" for the ending recap video and "Baby Hates Me" and "Save Me Sorrow" in build-up video packages. --Oakster 11:55, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you are probably correct, oakster. Speaking of theme songs, god I am getting tired of the "Big Time" song. They use a song for Wrestlemania 22 that they could've used for Wrestlemania 2. It certainly is different than the usual songs they use, for example: "KoRn", "Seether, "Drowning Pool", and "Saliva", etc, as opposed to Peter Gabriel. Jman5 23:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Start/Finish Time

Hi All... I can seem to find what time the show actually starts and finishes, can anyone help me out with that? --TedEBare 03:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Show starts at 7 PM EDT (4 PM PDT) and ends around 11 PM EDT. Eenu (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget to set your clock back one hour on Sunday morning or you'll be off for the actual show start. BronzeWarrior 09:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

71.29.36.55 12:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC) Spring Forward, Fall Back

Erm...

Is it just me, or did the Backlash promo give away the ending to the Cena/HHH match? Poofyspikes 00:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I didn't see WrestleMania and therefore didn't see the ad. What exactly was it? Jeff Silvers 03:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

There were loads of things like that - e.g JBL winning the US title, you knew Rey would become World heavyweight - Angle's tweener, Orton's Heel, and Smackdown can't have 3 heel champs (MNM + JBL) can it? Kingfisherswift 16:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

How did the Backlash promo give away the ending of the Cena match?? Cena never lost the belt and so therefore didn't need to 'take back what was his'... SCREW YOU IWC KNOW-NOTHING KNOW-IT-ALLS!!!!

If you're going to call names and be verbally abusive, at least have the guts to sign your comments. IWC is well aware that Vince intentionally changes match endings and puts up false ads and posters to swerve endings. Therefore most of the "know-it-alls" you're bitching about wouldn't have assumed Trips was winning just because of the Backlash ad. BronzeWarrior 03:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

D-Generation X

While HBK and Triple H made DX references during the show, it's not important enough to have it warrant its own section. The references should be included in the Trivia or Results section. OutRider2003 03:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I moved them, but apparently someone decided to move them back. Jeff Silvers 03:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I elaborated on it in the Results for the John Cena vs. Triple H match. That should work out for the best. OutRider2003 03:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Appears someone moved it into the Trivia. OutRider2003 03:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

"Fuck you, Cena" or "F you, Cena?"

The article originally said that the fans were chanting "fuck you, Cena." This has since been edited to "F you, Cena." I didn't see WrestleMania so I don't know if the fans used the actual word or not. If so, then "fuck" definitely belongs in the article. Jeff Silvers 03:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I watched WrestleMania, and I was able to tell they were saying "Fuck You, Cena". However, it can be hard to pick out because the fans wouldn't stop chanting between that and "Let's Go, Cena". OutRider2003 03:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I was in Chicago at the show and it was definitely "Fuck you Cena," no doubt about it. They started chanting it a half hour before the show even began. BronzeWarrior 03:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The Rock?

I saw that somebody put up something abou the Rock announcing his return, but it was later taken down. Was that BS? (I didn't see WM this year69.9.30.129 04:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Wild speculation. WWE never announced it and neither did Rock. BronzeWarrior 03:15, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

HHH vs Cena

Was making this match last insted of orton vs angle vs ray because the wwe was kissing HHH ass or trying to make john cena look like main event wrestler?

This is discussed up there ^^^^ somewhere... It's because WWE are pushing Cena as their #1 face... Ignore what the IWC say... Matt 4/4/06

Yes, because we're usually right, Cena has not been treated as a main eventer since WWE Backlash. -Dr. R.K.Z

Rey Mysterio's Title Win

I just want to clarify something. Mysterio is the first Mexican-American to win the World Heavyweight Championship in the WWE, not the second. OutRider2003 22:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

What about Eddie Guerrero? It says on his at wikipedia "Eddie Guerrero, was an American professional wrestler of Hispanic descent. Born into a legendary Mexican wrestling family..." Just wondering if that made him a Mexican-American due to him being born into a "Mexican wrestling family..." PedroV1 01:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

That was the WWE Championship, not the World Heavyweight Championship. 88.107.136.117 02:34, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, Eddie Guerrero won the WWE title, never the World Heavyweight title. OutRider2003 00:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, can I just clear something up? Rey is in the cruiserweight division (he is a cruiserweight in sense). So how can that make him legible for the World Heavyweight Title? --OrtonFan2006 11:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Rey has pinned heavyweights before in his career, going back to WCW by defeating Kevin Nash, he qualifies in that aspect. Reallisticlly...WWE deliberatly neglect their own continuity from time to time, and expect the audience to like it. -User:Dr. R.K.Z

there are several ways to think about it differently:imagine j.j. redick playing a 1-on-1 against alan iverson.kinda like that.67.185.150.130

User:Ortonfan2006, there is a very simple reason why Rey can compete for the WHT, even though he is a cruiserweight. The titles have an upper weight-limit, but no lower weight-limit. So Rey (at approx 200lbs) could step up and wrestle for the World title, but HHH (at approx 270lbs) couldn't step down and wrestle for the CW title. The CW title has an upper weight-limit, but the other titles have no lower weight-limit.--HDC7777 17:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Wrestlemania 22 DVD release in Canada.

Does anybody know if May 22 is the release day of the DVD in Canada? In Amazon Canada it states the release, in Canada, as June 6. Anybody know? TripleH1976 11:18 a.m., 15 May 2006 (UTC)

sorry i dont knoooooow.....checj wwe shop and other things like that.

Wrestlemania PPV Buy Rate

The "900,000" figure displayed in this article is incorrect and very misleading. There are two main reasons for this:

• 1. The freqently quoted figure by WWE is "over 925,000" buys, not "900,000".
• 2. This figure of "over 925,000 buys" however is very misleading as this figure is in fact the total COMBINED world wide PPV sales figure! So it is USA PPV buys + INTERNATIONAL PPV buys !!

You can check both of these points for yourself, here is WWE's press release on their corporate website which clearly says : "preliminary estimates to date of world-wide pay-per-view buys for WrestleMania 22 are more than 925,000" at the top of the first paragraph : http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2006/2006_05_17.jsp

Also as an extra reference here is WWE's Fourth Quarter 2006 conference call presentation where the "925,000" figure is again clearly displayed on page 8 (PDF document) : http://corporate.wwe.com/documents/4QF2006PresentationFINAL.pdf

By only talking about the combined world wide PPV buy rate for wrestlemania, it is very clear that WWE are deliberately trying to mislead everyone the best they can and cover up their in fact very disappointing domestic PPV sales for their so called "biggest event of the year". However as WWE is a public company, they must disclose their full PPV figure breakdowns, and so here it is:

• WM 22 Domistic (USA) Buys : 560,000
• WM 22 International Buys  : 370,000
• WM 22 Total PPV Buy Rate : 930,000

The main country from which the international buys came from is the UK where WWE on PPV is a relatively new and rare thing. WWE PPV figures have historically always been given as US ppv figures, but wwe saw that their ppv buys were going down domestically, so thats why they started PPV in the UK and thats why they feel the need to COMBINE these figures! Don't be misled!

These figures have been reported by Dave Meltzer of The Wrestling Observer, The LAW (liveaudiowrestling.com) and MMA Weekly - ALL highly reliable sources for Wrestling/MMA news. Here for reference is the MMA weekly article where the domestic figure is quoted (6th paragraph from bottom): http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=2359&zoneid=3

The bottom line is, the US PPV buy rate and International PPV buy rate should be posted separately in order not to mislead people like WWE are trying to do. 81.154.251.229 20:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

And IT IS "NOTABLE" because WWE PPV figures have ALWAYS been given as US buy rates. This meant that all WWE PPV's success in terms of buys in the US market could be compared with each other and also with other events in the US PPV market such as boxing and UFC/MMA. However, WWE realised that their PPV buys in the US were diving, so they have started playing with the numbers by adding them all together and trying to mislead everyone by presenting bigger numbers. THIS IS VERY NOTABLE !! The PPV figures for the US and International must be separated and made clear ! 81.154.251.229 00:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone needs to give me a GOOD reason why the buyrate should even be included, otherwise it's going to be removed later. TJ Spyke 00:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The buyrate is a direct measure of the success of the pay-per-view and the revenue it earned. It is more important than the results, which could be dismissed as fancruft. McPhail 00:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

People looking at an article on WrestleMania 22 would care more about the results than how many people bought the PPV. The buyrate is fancruft. TJ Spyke 00:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

WWE is a profit-seeking corporation that holds pay-per-view events in pursuit of profit. The WrestleMania buyrate accounts for a percentage of that profit. The buyrate is the reason for the event being held. You don't know why people are reading the page - I imagine WWE stockholders care more about the money earned by the event than who won the Playboy pillow fight. McPhail 00:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

If the results are dismissed as fancruft in your opinion, then there would be no point in having articles on Wrestling events. -- bulletproof ^3:16 00:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

And do you imagine WWE stockholders would go on Wikipedia to see how much money they earned too? Wikipedia is not a primary source. The information is redundant on Wikipedia. -- bulletproof ^3:16 00:45, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

By the same logic, wrestling fans would get their results from WWE.com, rendering results redundant. McPhail 00:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

In that case, all wrestling event articles on Wikipedia would be removed. Buyrates are not notable. -- bulletproof ^3:16 00:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect. As previously stated, buyrates reflect the revenue earned from the event, and, thus, the success of the event. McPhail 00:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

TJ Spyke -

• 1 Who do you think you are, saying "someone needs to give YOU a good reason" to keep the buyrate !?! This is a very offensive tone. It makes you seem like you think you are some sort of god here when you clearly are not and in fact we are all equals. Remember that during discussions.

• 2 Its also extremely arrogant of you to claim you know "why" everybody looks at this page on wikipedia. You, or any 1 person couldn't possibly know the many reasons why people might look at this page. This type of attitude is sensless and is not needed here in these discussions or on wikipedia.

Now as for the ppv figure, it is VERY relevant to the ppv (hence thats WHY its a damn PPV!!!). If the aim of a ppv was not to get a ppv figure, then why do they even bother having ppv's !?!?! Also, internet wrestling fans are very much interested in PPV figures for each show as it shows its success - thats why the figures are reported on wrestling news sites for every single ppv every month - because people care and read it!!!! So nobody should ever dare to "tell" people what information they want or don't want to read as that would equal blatant censorship and this isn't communist china so you have no damn right to censor correct information!!

In general, no information that is correct and relevant should ever be discarded simply because some arrogant people think that no one cares about that info. Quite simply, The more correct info, the better! 81.154.251.152 21:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Verifiability

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that any reader must be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, because Wikipedia does not publish original thought or original research.

Wikipedia:Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's three content-guiding policies. The other two are Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the main namespace. They should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should therefore try to familiarize themselves with all three. The principles upon which these three policies are based are negotiable only at the foundation level, not at the level of the English-language Wikipedia.

Articles should rely on credible, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. For academic subjects, the sources should preferably be peer-reviewed. Sources should also be appropriate to the claims made: outlandish claims require stronger sources (Such as WWE.com).

One of the keys to writing good encyclopedia articles is to understand that they must refer only to facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have already been published by reputable publishers. The goal of Wikipedia is to become a complete and reliable encyclopedia. Editors should cite reliable sources so that their edits may be verified by readers and other editors.

"Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth. -- bulletproof ^3:16 23:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's a Deal (again)

Here's a deal again. do not change the pre-show match ever! m'kay.

Who the heck?

Someone made a really wieeeeeeeeered match. it was two random men, fighting for something called the WWE DADS TITLE. And they tried to make it some 25 mins long. If people continue to do thing s like that the page will be locked from changes being made.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.120.177 (talk • contribs)

Tagline

Who put the tagline for wm 22 as "wrestlemania goes hollywood"? If the event took place at rosemont, illinois, how can it be in hollywood? I changed it to "big time" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Reeezy (talk • contribs) 15:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

baby hates me

was not the official song for mania it was for backlash.TheManWhoLaughs 00:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Not according to WWE.com-- bulletproof ^3:16 01:46, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Well then WWE is wrong.TheManWhoLaughs 02:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Well until you provide a reliable source that states what the themes were, "Baby Hates Me" is staying in the article per Wikipedia:Verifiability.-- bulletproof ^3:16 02:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

No Singles Matches

Although some titles were defended in singles matches, was this WrestleMania the only one not to have a plain one-on-one non-title match? If so, would it be placed in the trivia section?--Lord Dagon 13:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope. In fact, WrestleMania 2000 had no one-on-onn singles matches at all (unless you count the "Cat fight", which wasn't really a match since the only goal was to thrown the other women out of the ring). TJ Spyke 22:32, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MysterioRey22.jpg

Image:MysterioRey22.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Retconned history

I'll ask if this is noteworthy: the video package (and official history presented by Joey Styles during the event) made the claim that Edge's brief WWE Title reign was ended by John Cena at the Royal Rumble with Mick Foley as referee. In fact, these were two separate matches: Cena defeated Edge on 29 January at the Royal Rumble, and during Edge's contractually obligated rematch on 13 February, Foley as referee counted the three to lead to Cena retaining. Should this be posted here, elsewhere, or anywhere?

It wasn't retconned history. It was just a normal mistake. This is similar to how WWE.com sometimes said that Saliva performed "Always" at WrestleMania X8 when they really performed "Superstar". It’s just that sometimes we all forget things that may have happened in the past. Just a normal mistake.-- bulletproof ^3:16 01:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)