Talk:TNA Lockdown

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the TNA Lockdown article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Professional wrestling Low‑importance

	TNA Lockdown is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[WarGames match#Total Nonstop Action Wrestling|Lethal Lockdown]] Anchor WarGames match#Total Nonstop Action Wrestling links to a specific web page: Total Nonstop Action Wrestling. The anchor (#Total Nonstop Action Wrestling) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Daniels vs. Liger

I've readded the Christopher Daniels / Jushin Liger match, because, though there have been reports Liger won't be able to attend, it's still official as far as the TNA "canon" goes. MarcK 04:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The match was removed from the TNA website before Impact aired. McPhail 20:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lockdown 2007 trivia

Who keeps on removing the trivia? I think that its needed. It refers to a future Lockdown event.Rollinman 07:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because fan petitions (which work like 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the time) aren't notable. I could start a petition that WrestleMania 24 should be in Berlin, but would deserve to go into the WM article? No, especially since sites like petition.com make it so anyone can start a petition about anything. TJ Spyke 00:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Match stipulations

Is it really notable to specify when a match is simply a "Six Sides of Steel match", given the premise behind Lockdown? Obviously more elaborate matches like Lethal Lockdown or Xscape should be noted, but I don't think it's necessary to say "X beat Y in a Six Sides of Steel match" or "Six Sides of Steel Match: X vs. Y" for basically every match on the card. MarcK 05:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it doesn't matter either way, but it makes it easier for new users who might not check the top of the page before looking at the results. TJ Spyke 21:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it seems a little much, like there are words everywhere. Looks busch leauge, I would change it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.70.5 (talk) 00:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Stating the cage at the top of each list of matches should do it. --Aaru Bui ^DII 16:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and edited it as requested. Also, I added that the Jackie Moore/Gail Kim fight was billed as the first Ladies Steel cage match in TNA. 74.192.21.115 01:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I don't think it's a big deal if they are mentioned. Looks better IMO. TJ Spyke 01:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, someone edited it back in less than a minute. So I'm guessing we aren't at consensus here? (Really annoys me, it took me some time to get it all right). 74.192.21.115 01:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Damnit, I edited back and someone once again edited it back in. Whoever keeps reverting it, please come to the discussion page so we can come to consensus rather that revert each other over and over again. 74.192.21.115 01:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look two comments up. They are part of the matches, and IMO it looks better to list them next to each match. TJ Spyke 01:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ladies 6 side of steels

Why should we add the word ladies in front for the Kim vs Moore fight? --Soopafred 00:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what Cornette called it, but I suppose it's not really needed. TJ Spyke 01:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fans and the Blindfold Match

Is it considered proper to put details like fans booing in the section right after describing the Blindfold match? I feel it is somewhat noteworthy 74.192.21.115 01:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, because it's not that notable. Fans have booed other matches (not just in TNA, but others fes as well), it's no big deal. TJ Spyke 01:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any situation where it would be notable? 74.192.21.115 01:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Booing during a match? No. If the fans booed after something like Owen Hart's death (where they continued the show), then that would be notable. It's the same way we wouldn't note when the fans cheer something. TJ Spyke 01:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Now for the cheering example, I understand there are nominees and winners for Match of the Year (is that a real contest or just something talked about in forums). If it is a real competition than would we put a note by the match if it is nominated or wins? 74.192.21.115 01:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Match of the Year refers to TNA's end of year awards where fans can vote on TNA's website for awards like Match of the Year, Mr. TNA (which A.J. Styles won for the first three years), Who to watch in 200x (who the fans think will have the best upcoming year), etc. Winners are noted, nominess usually aren't. TJ Spyke 01:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blood in the Electrified Cage Match

I had heard tale that there was a "No Blood" law in St. Louis, however, Brother D-Von (I think) appears to be bleeding. Is this noteworthy, or even correct? Can anyone confirm the no blood rule? 74.192.21.115 02:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't heard that, someone can check though. We didn't note when WWE got in trouble for letting wrestlers bleed in Kentucky, so it probably wouldn't be noted here either. TJ Spyke 02:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kip James` Cobra Clutch Slam

Shouldn`t it be called Missouri Boat Ride? Mike Tenay named it like that. --Soopafred 03:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall him calling it that before. Do you have a link or something if he called it that tonight? TJ Spyke 03:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think my ears are good enough. Soopafred 01:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Format Change?

Should Lockdown be changed to the format of a big show ala WWE's Royal Rumble, Survivor Series, WrestleMania, SummerSlam and TNA's Bound for Glory and Slammiversary. I mean It is one of TNA's "Big Three" and I thought maybe we should change it to that format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.70.133 (talk • contribs)

How do you mean? TNA doesn't treat it differently than any of their other PPV's. TNA's only major events at the moment are Slammiversary (since it's their annual anniversary show) and Bound for Glory (since it is their versions of WrestleMania). TJ Spyke 06:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dixie Carter stated in an interview that its one of the three big PPVs they do with Slammi and BFG because of the all steel cage match format. If that doesn't do it for you it was on the road. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.22.1 (talk) 21:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Do you have any reliable sources? TJ Spyke 21:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UK-cutouts

Did anyone else notice the cutouts in the UK version on Bravo 2? especially not being able to see Hernandez go through the table OR Jarrett take the thumbtack guitar shot, what the hell went on? RichPlaystation 20:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, it wasnt exactly hard to notice them, bravo cut out most of those 2 matches. PayneXKiller 13:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attendance

I don't know what it was but it was way more than 3,800. The place was almost sold out and it was set up for about 7,000. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.22.1 (talk • contribs)

Do you have a source for a different number? I know this reliable site, but they don't have the PPV report for about 2 weeks. TJ Spyke 21:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do't think an official number has been reported by Meltzer or Keller but it defiently not 3800. The place was set up for about 7000 and it was very close to a sell out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.22.129 (talk) 00:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The source we do have says 3800, so that is what we are using. We can't guess or estimate our own number (since that would be original research, which isn't allowed here). TJ Spyke 01:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could had swarn that I saw a source that came from the WON that mentioned a higher attendence number. The one I postd only mentioned ticket sales on the day of the show. If you can find a source with the higher number, by all means, add it and include the source.--Raderick 17:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about guessing or estimating, I'm talking about how it defiently wasn't 3800 and how it should be blank untill an offical number is announced. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.22.2 (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Please read my replies again. The 3800 number is sourced, and WP cares more about whether something can be verified rather than if it's true or not. The 3800 number can be verified, so that's why we are using it for now. TJ Spyke 21:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Funny how it has now been changed to 6000. Note that sourced isn't the same as verified. Not very reliable sources anyway. I was there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardTNA (talk • contribs) 12:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um, you know you replied to a 2 year old comment? Also, who cares if you were there? That has nothing to do with the attendance number. TJ Spyke 23:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2008

That should be changed until it's official. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.4.220 (talk) 02:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.4.220 (talk) 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Until Lockdown 2008 is announced, the city and arena should be TBA. Maybe we should protect this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.4.220 (talk) 04:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Impact Zone

Can somebody please edit the article back so that the location is shown as "Impact! Zone" rather than "TNA Impact! Zone"? It is always called just "Impact! Zone", and we always use what the arena is usually called (i.e. "MEN Arena" rather than "Manchester Evening News Arena", or "Tsongas Arena" rather than "Tsongas Center at the University of Massachusetts Lowell"). TJ Spyke 23:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any source for these names TJ or just your opinion?--WillC 05:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You mean like how on TV the wrestlers and announcers always just say Impact Zone, or how on their website they just use Impact Zone [1]. I personally (and I know this sentence doesn't affect it) have never seen or heard it called "TNA Impact! Zone" rather than just "Impact! Zone". At the very least, TNA doesn't do it. TJ Spyke 15:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is called shorthand and yes TNA have referred to it as the "TNA Impact! Zone" several times. The name of the article is TNA Impact! Zone, thus that title should be used.--WillC 16:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"TNA Impact! Zone" is rarely ever used and is definitely not the common name. I have also pointed out that with locations, we usually use what the venue is commonly called. TJ Spyke 17:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this guideline you speak of? Is it common name? If so then you have to prove the common name. That means getting the proof and getting a discussion together to change the name of TNA Impact! Zone.--WillC 20:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

COMMONNAME is for re-naming the article. I am not trying to do that. I am just saying that when mentioning the location we should just use the commonname, like we do for real arenas (as I pointed out above). TJ Spyke 21:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That makes no sense. You are saying the commonname of the arena is the Impact! Zone, but yet are saying to not rename the article, though have still yet to show proof that ImpacT! Zone is the common name. Common sense shows that is just a shorthand of TNA Impact! Zone, which Tenay has said countless times at the start of broadcasts.--WillC 04:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Impact Zone and TNA Impact Zone I think its needless to say which it should be referred to by looking at the results. Afro (Its More Than a Feeling) ^{- Afkatk} 06:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]