Template talk:Professional wrestling sidebar

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Professional wrestling Professional wrestling sidebar 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 template 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

@Czello: @Mt.FijiBoiz: @Dustin5StarMemphisoYeah0:

Currently the "Notable People" section is already formatted so that all promoters are at the top and all performers are at the bottom. As this list is already the most populated section, one could argue it could benefit from formalising that division and splitting them into two lists. Do you agree or disagree?

I think the only issue, if we did divide it, would be individuals such as Paul Levesque/Triple H, Jeff Jarrett, Atsushi Onita, Giant Baba etc who are/were both notable performers and promoters. If we split the "Notable people" list into two lists, should those individuals be listed in both lists, or just the category that was considered their "primary" one? CeltBrowne (talk) 23:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I initially thought that the "Notable people" section was best organized by promoters/bookers on top and in-ring performers on the bottom, I am starting to think otherwise. In my opinion, there is too much overlap between the two categories to split the section into two or even continue to organize the currently existing unified section in the manner of placing promoters/bookers on top and in-ring performers on bottom. I think it would be best to keep one "Notable people" section but organize it by alphabetical order. Dustin5StarMemphisoYeah0 17:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even though it leaves room open for bickering, I feel like chronological is better for the Notable people section than alphabetical. I've tested/previewed how it looks alphabetical and I find it jumbled and difficult to parse.

Keeping the status quo is fine, but I'd still be interested to hear the thoughts of the other two pinged users, who may currently be unavailable due to the time of year. CeltBrowne (talk) 01:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that chronological order is the best way to organize the section, rather than alphabetically. But I think we should remove the distinction between promoters and wrestlers. Right now Ed Lewis is separated from Billy Sandow and Toots Mondt, despite all three being members of the highly influential Gold Dust Trio. This separation seems to be because Lewis was primarily a wrestler and Sandow and Toots were primarily promoters, but Lewis did promote and both Sandow and Toots wrestled. The separation makes no sense to me. Mt.FijiBoiz (talk) 17:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree with the removal of the distinctions - there's too much cross-overs between the various roles in the professional wrestling industry to try to make distinctions between various roles. Also the consensus amongst the active editors of the editors to arrange by chronological order instead of alphabetical order. I'll edit the template to reflect the consensus. Dustin5StarMemphisoYeah0 (talk) 21:53, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with keeping them as one, as it's rare to find a notable wrestler who hasn't held another position in or related to wrestling (e.g. podcasting, booking). Секретное общество (talk) 04:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recently had an edit that had been reverted some-what due to cluttering. I understand it completely, however there are some things quite wrong with the edit, in my opinion. It involves wrestlers being added to the notable wrestlers tab. Although some of them can be understandably taken off, some of my suggestions feel like they had been taken off for poor reasons.

The biggest examples of which, for me, include the following:

Promotions - DDT Pro-Wrestling

1970s and 1980s - The British Bulldogs, The Crush Gals, Gran Hamada, Johnny Saint, Jumbo Tsuruta, Yoshiaki Fujiwara

1990s - Big Van Vader

2000s - Adam "Edge" Copeland, The Hardy Boyz, Naomichi Marufuji

2010s and 2020s - Becky Lynch, Charlotte Flair, Jon Moxley, Seth Rollins, Will Ospreay

I look forward to take each case separately in the talk page, particularly when it comes to how much influence they've had on the wrestling business. Please consider them as such, and not with any bias. Thank you. Frippinator (talk) 23:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• DDT is currently included in the promotion list
• The 1970s/1980s section already includes 22 figures and The 1990s section already includes 21 figures. I think a section is getting too big at the 15 names mark, and is going out of control at the 20 mark, so that's a square to circle (if you'll pardon the pun) when it comes to adding yet more names.
• When it comes to the 2010s/2020s, I think we should be very cautious because once you include one "iffy" figure, other editors are going to try and argue "You put iffy figure X in, so surely iffy figure Y must also go in!". While I would like to see more women included in the list, as far as western women go, I don't think the "Women's Evolution" and subsequently success of women can be attributed to any one woman. This makes things difficult because then you have to sort out who was the most influential between women such as Flair, Lynch, Banks, Bayley, Rousey, Ripley, Morgan, Bliss, etc etc etc and arguments can be made for all of them.
• I think listing people as a "unit" should be avoided as it only serves to add more text to an already cluttered field
• I was a massive fan of Marufuji and KENTA in the 2000s (I was lucky enough to be able to see NOAH on the Wrestling Channel), and their inclusion helps avoid the list being too American-centric, but I'm not sure they were the most notable Japanese figures of the 2000s. It'd be good to get another person who is well versed in Japanese wrestling history to comment.

CeltBrowne (talk) 00:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For me, personally, Marufuji has a profound influence on pro wrestling due to the style he presented to both Japanese fans and to Western fans (shouts to the Wrestling Channel, of course, but also to tape collectors and distributors to streaming sites). If you'd see popular moves today such as the Shiranui, the diving Moonsault Slam (a-la credits to The S.A.T.) and the curb stomp (Rollins, of-course!), they'd all be traced down based upon Marufuji. Also with his style of King's Road fusing with some notable aspects of Hamada-style Lucharesu, it makes him a unique blend and someone that was a considerable credit to independent wrestlers at the same time period of which he was most sought in the tape collecting world.

I agree with the unit listing. Although having special regards to factions is considered in other articles, doing it in a field like the Pro wrestling one is just too much for it to handle.

I also appreciate the pun! Real good stuff. Frippinator (talk) 02:53, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think influencing other people's movesets is a good benchmark for notability, otherwise people like Nova would be contenders.

I think we have to go with who reliable, secondary sources and who the industry itself thinks are notable. So for example someone who is both in the WWE Hall of Fame and the Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame is someone who it is not controversial to call notable. CeltBrowne (talk) 03:35, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't really that much of the point. Meant to word it at least a bit differently. It's in special regards to how the person's style transcends to wrestlers both in Japan and in the West.

Also, I forgot to add onto your comment: It'd be good to get another person who is well versed in Japanese wrestling history to comment. I actually happen to be a bit of a historian and have been in key interest to puroresu for almost a decade, so I've definitely seen some stuff. From what I can personally say in those regards, I think that it would be suffice to say that Naomichi Marufuji is among the most influential modern puroresu stars, especially with the reasons that I had listed. KENTA would be within range of that as well, however with his recognition in terms of pre-WWE standards coming in as pretty much thinner than Marufuji's to some extent, I can't really list him off as such to be as influential as they were to be.

There can also be numerous factors to include someone into a list like this as well. I fully agree with your point at the end. Frippinator (talk) 03:57, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

especially with the reasons that I had listed

The only reason you've listed so far is their in-ring influence on other stars though, which I've already said is not a good benchmark.

The WON Hall of Fame includes in-ring influence on other wrestlers as one of several critiea for deciding who is deserving to go in. Neither Gran Hamada nor Marufuji is in that Hall of Fame (as of yet at any rate).

Without reliable, secondary sources, this is where we get into subjective opinions. We can't base the list off what you or I personally like or rate highly. As per every thing else on Wikipedia, it has to be based off what experts in the field would say. CeltBrowne (talk) 04:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would nominate adding Matt Hardy or changing Hardy Boyz to the list. There are several sources that indicate him as such. I would also consider changing Jeff Hardy to The Hardy Boyz, since understandably a lot of the reason for both having a case would be their time as a tag team, and still encompasses them as individuals. Though my thought would be to just add him as well PistonsFan2223 (talk) 00:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are several sources that indicate him as such

What are those sources? CeltBrowne (talk) 08:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Hardy Discusses the Risks of Experimenting with the 'Broken' Gimmick and Origins of "DELETE" – Fightful

https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-talks-risks-experimenting-broken-gimmick-origins-delete​Fightful News

Matt Hardy Shares the Inspiration Behind Doing His Cinematic Matches – 411MANIA

https://411mania.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-inspiration-cinematic-matches/​411mania’s Comment Policy+2411mania’s Comment Policy+2411mania’s Comment Policy+2

Cody Rhodes Calls Matt Hardy One of the 'Very First' to Touch Cinematic Matches – 411MANIA

https://411mania.com/wrestling/cody-rhodes-matt-hardy-brodie-lee/​411mania’s Comment Policy+2411mania’s Comment Policy+2411mania’s Comment Policy+2

Analyzing the History and Evolution of WWE's TLC Match – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2678224-analyzing-the-history-and-evolution-of-wwes-tlc-match​Bleacher Report

WWE and TNA Roundtable: The Hardy Boyz Are the Greatest Tag Team Ever – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/909822-wwe-tna-roundtable-the-hardy-boyz-are-the-greatest-tag-team-ever​:contentReference[oaicite:12]{index=12}

Adaptability and Longevity

Exclusive: AEW's Matt Hardy on Hardy Boyz Reunion, Dream Match, Podcasting & More – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2953764-exclusive-aews-matt-hardy-on-hardy-boyz-reunion-dream-match-podcasting-more​:contentReference[oaicite:13]{index=13}

Matt Hardy Discusses His Favorite TLC Match, WWE's Use of Cinematic Matches – 411MANIA

https://411mania.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-favorite-tlc-match-wwe-cinematic-matches/​:contentReference[oaicite:14]{index=14}

Influence on Future Wrestlers and Storytelling Styles

Matt Hardy Gets Into Twitter Fight With Jim Cornette Over The Young Bucks – 411MANIA

https://411mania.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-twitter-fight-jim-cornette/​:contentReference[oaicite:15]{index=15}

Matt Hardy Explains Jeff's Fall at Double or Nothing as a Setup for HOOK – 411MANIA

https://411mania.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-jeff-fall-double-or-nothing-setup-hook/

With ‘Broken’ Brilliance, Matt Hardy Continues to Change the Game – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2700276-with-broken-brilliance-matt-hardy-continues-to-change-the-game

Matt Hardy Talks the 'Broken' Gimmick and Origins of “DELETE” – Fightful

https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-talks-broken-matt-hardy-gimmick-origins-delete

Analyzing the Evolution of WWE’s TLC Match – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2360501-analyzing-the-evolution-of-wwe-tlc-match

WWE/TNA Roundtable: Are the Hardyz the Greatest Tag Team Ever? – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2719457-wwe-tna-roundtable-are-the-hardyz-the-greatest-tag-team-ever

Matt Hardy on Mastering Reinvention and Longevity – Fightful

https://www.fightful.com/wrestling/matt-hardy-talks-mastering-reinvention-longevity

Cody Rhodes on Matt Hardy’s Cinematic Match Influence – 411Mania

https://411mania.com/wrestling/cody-rhodes-praises-matt-hardy-cinematic-matches/

Doc Gallows Credits Matt Hardy for Cinematic Match Revolution – 411Mania

https://411mania.com/wrestling/doc-gallows-credits-matt-hardy-cinematic-matches/

Matt Hardy and the Broken Universe: Creative Risks and Fan Reactions – Pro Wrestling Torch

https://www.pwtorch.com/site/2016/07/30/veterans-spotlight-broken-matt-hardy-has-won-over-fans-and-wrestling-critics/

The Hardy Boyz and the Ladder Match Revolution – Bleacher Report

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2073841-the-hardy-boyz-and-the-ladder-match-revolution PistonsFan2223 (talk) 12:22, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would at a minimum say Jeff Hardy is already on the list because of The Hardy Boyz influence PistonsFan2223 (talk) 12:22, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you use AI to generate this list? That seems certainly to be the case because most of the url links are...broken. But even if they weren't, per Wikipedia:PW/RS we don't consider 411mania or Bleacher Reporter as reliable sources.

You also didn't quote any of the relevant text, you just dumped random links.

I've previous said things like the WWE Hall of Fame and Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame indicate notability. Matt and Jeff are in neither. CeltBrowne (talk) 15:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to edit the links before posting here. But majority are about Matt/Hardy Boyz influence in title itself. Although if that is the standard, there are people in both not included. And Jeff alone is on here, by your criteria should't he be removed? (again, your criteria, I think both Hardys should be on it) PistonsFan2223 (talk) 15:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would the compromise be changing Jeff Hardy to The Hardy Boyz to incorporate all the contributions, individually and as a team? PistonsFan2223 (talk) 16:13, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like if both the Hardys were/are listed, people would have a strong right to say "Well wait a minute; the Dudley Boys won more tag titles than other other tag team in the same period. Why are the Hardys on the list and not the Dudleys?" CeltBrowne (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps they could be, but that's another topic. I’d argue that the Hardy Boyz' inclusion isn’t just about title counts, it’s about cultural and stylistic influence in the 2000s. The Hardys helped redefine what tag team wrestling looked like for an entire generation. Their high-risk, innovative style wasn’t just exciting—it inspired a wave of future wrestlers. Plus, Matt and Jeff each had major solo impact: Jeff became a world champion and a top merch-seller, while Matt helped evolve storytelling in wrestling through multiple character reinventions and held more solo championships in this time period than Both Dudleys did in their careers. PistonsFan2223 (talk) 21:37, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mt.FijiBoiz: Please stop deleting Iran from the areas -particularly not without any explanation. There is a Wrestling in Iran article with a Professional Wrestling section therefore it is eligible. The links for Saudi Arabia and Bolivia do not point to "Professional Wrestling in Country X" articles either. If you continue blanking this off without discussion I shall have to regard it as vandalism.Romomusicfan (talk) 22:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An issue I mentioned previously is that in the 2010s/2020s period, it's hard to place someone like Becky Lynch into the list and then not list any other women, because a strong argument can be made that she is not head and shoulders above her peers. Perhaps the wisest thing to do is, much like Pro Wrestling Illustrated has separate men and women's lists for the year, and much like the Wrestling Observer Newsletter awards have separate men and women awards, the notable people section should be divided by gender. Thoughts? CeltBrowne (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How are Giulia, Sareee, Syuri, and Utami Hayashishita listed as notable women? Per what criteria? e.g. how is Giulia's career more notable than Stephanie Vaquer's? Or what makes Sareee, Syuri, and Utami more special than Hikaru Shida? 5-star matches? Would you please post a summary/clarification about their notability/importance in pro wrestling history? What have they achieved? --Mann Mann (talk) 02:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In each of the notable persons lists, and in each decade, I've tried to balance the lists regionally. In the women's section, you can see that amongst names included are La Dama Enmascarada, Faby Apache and Marcela, despite the fact these names might not be as well known in the English speaking world. This was to acknowledge Mexico/Lucha Libre. Balancing for Japan was/is obviously easier, as in the 20th century Women's wrestling was strongest in Japan.

The reason the 2020s section is currently like it is as as a follow-on from keeping things regionally balanced. Part of the criteria was looking at who are the most prominent names in Japan currently.

I've said previous on this talk page that listing people from this decade is always the most controversial thing. Previously I suggested we be conservative in this area and simply keep the names to a minimum to avoid conversations were people are annoyed, such as the one we're having now. That is also the reason the men's section is "2010s and 2020s" rather than 2020s on it's own; it's less controversial when the two decades as grouped together.

To adjust, we could group the women into "2010s and 2020s" as well and cut out a number of names. However, I'd be nervous in a combined "2010s and 2020s" users would be inclined to slant heavily towards US/WWE names without consideration for other promotions/countries.

Alternatively to grouping the 2010s and 2020s together, you could suggest alternative names for a revised 2020s section.

Alternatively to that, we could cut the 2020s all together, to avoid recency bias altogether.

What are your thoughts? CeltBrowne (talk) 05:39, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just can't get my head around this sidebar. More examples: Sara Del Rey is there but not Sable and Sunny, seriously?! Sable was a draw during attitude era. And Sunny does not need any introduction. Where is The Beautiful People? Talking about history of TNA, but zero mention of TBP? In my opinion, we better get community consensus for this sidebar; both its format/structure and notable wrestlers. A new section or taking this to WT:PW. --Mann Mann (talk) 13:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you could just do WP:BRD

The list was never intended to be perfect (it can't be, it will always have elements of subjectivity to it, although I tried to minimise this by cross-referencing with Pro Wrestling Illustrated "Top Women" lists) and was always intended for other editors to have input, either by directly editing it after it was put up, or by discussing it here on the talk page (See: Template talk:Professional wrestling sidebar#Idea: Split "Notable people" section to "Notable Men" and "Notable Women").

I did seriously consider adding the Beautiful People. While I ultimately didn't include them, I did recongise TNA by including Awesome Kong and Gail Kim. Sara Del Rey was added because she was one of the mainstays of SHIMMER, which was one of the only notable women's promotions in North America in the 2000s and early 2010s.

I did seriously consider adding Sable and Sunny, but both of their cases hinge on very short runs in WWE rather than longlasting careers. If you look at the rest of the list, most of the other women have careers that lasted decades, not years. CeltBrowne (talk) 16:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]