Jump to content

Talk:Mickie James

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.111.242.222 (talk) at 10:21, 18 June 2011 (→Reason for leaving WWE?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleMickie James has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 21, 2007Good article nomineeListed

Mickie James On Springer

I can't find a source for this, but Mickie James was on Jerry Springer. They did make a mention of it well over two years ago on Raw. If someone could find a source, than it would be good to add it to the article. Mr. C.C. (talk) 19:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is from my own personal knowledge, and as far as I know I've never seen it published. Mickie was a part of the roster for Maryland Championship Wrestling during the time that Steve Wilkos was associated with the promotion, and he selected her and several other wrestlers to participate as audience members. As far as I know, she did not participate in the show as a guest. Kamnet (talk) 17:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She was actually on Jenny Jones, although I guess its possible she was also on Springer. I added the Jenny Jones appearance to her article. --Celtic Jobber (talk) 06:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mickie James Poses for Leg Show

How come my addition of Mickie James Posing for Leg Show magazine was deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.93.167.109 (talk) 03:55, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um, maybe because it's already mentioned in the article (in the "Early career" section)? You would have to ask the person who deleted it, but that would be my guess. No need to include it again when it's already mentioned. TJ Spyke 03:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should it not be mentioned that she has denied that it is her in the pictures?--AndyCPrivate (talk) 12:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source? TJ Spyke 20:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

De-linking

A certain editor seems to think that relevant terms and stuff un-familiar to non-wrestling fans shouldn't be linked. Thy also think other notable and relevant info shouldn't be linked. This section is for them to state their case rather than revert over and over and accuse people of vandalism when they are restoring the page to the stable version that no one else has a problem with. TJ Spyke 22:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Where are you discussing it? Here, where I asked you to do it twice? Or on my talk page, where you sent me the message? I'll repost what I put in response to your message on my talk page here:

Why are you not willing to discuss the linking in the Mickie James article? And example of what I mean: :...Stratus' biggest fan turned obsessed stalker..." You want linked to the wrestling term "turn". However, the common English use of the word "turn" is to change. How does that differ from the wrestling definition. Terms like kayfabe.....yes, those are unique to wrestling and those links are appropriate. But linking words like "turn" really don't clarify anything to a non-fan, it just adds more blue type to an article that is already awash in it. Further, linking common words like "farm" don't enhance the article. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia and not a dictionary. Next, you keep re-adding links to things like "American", leading to the article about the United States. The overlink policy cites that as a specific example of what NOT to link. Links to locations, words etc that people commonly understand aren't needed. So no, Washington DC really shouldn't be linked. It is a location known to most readers. How many English speakers don't know what the United States is? Or what New York City is? Lastly, sending readers to generic articles doesn't enhance understanding this article, which is the purpose of linking. Does sending someone to the article about DC enhance their understanding?

I termed your wholesale reversion as "vandalism" because you aren't talking about specific things, but simply clicking undo. I have asked TWICE to discuss and you simply ignored it. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I am not the one who violated 3R Spyke. Before you talk about reverting "over and over", count your own reversions. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Also, when I removed the excessive links, I was careful to do so by section, so that it wouldn't be necessary to revert EVERYTHING just because someone disagreed with one term being delinked. A wholesale reversion is definately not wp:agf, especially when being asked to discuss your specific complaints. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have not violated 3RR either, I have done exactly 3 reverted (it's 4 that violates. And my first revert was to revert what I considered vandalism). I have trimmed out the un-needed links (like the turned obsessive stalker one and the farm one). The American link is only linked once and OVERLINK talks about linking to it as a geographic term (i.e. "lives in America"), it is used here as a nationality. Locations can be linked to if they are relevant, in this case where she grew up/trained to wrestle/etc. TJ Spyke 22:33, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um, it's more than 3 reversions.......not limited to the same material. Further, terming my delinking as "vandalism" isn't really valid either. In almost every instance, the actual text wasn't changed, just the WL removed. In other words, the same info that existed before existed after. That is not vandalism.

You know what, forget it. This my first step in trying to improve the article enough to put it up for GA review. One thing I've seen in reading GA reviews is that there was too much blue type (ie too many links). You clearly want to fight about every word involved and I have no interest in it. Let someone else improve the article and submit it for GA review. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is what 3RR says "Contributors must not perform more than three reverts on a single page". I have only made 3 reverts to the article in the last 24 hours (actually, those were my only edits to the page in the last 5 days), so I have not violated 3RR. TJ Spyke 22:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article is already a Good Article. Nikki♥311 22:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let's keep the conversation here rather than on our talkpages. You seem intent on de-linking "American". I already gave you one example of a Featured Article that includes the same link. Massive de-linking of terms relevant to the article hurts the article, not helps it and I would probably oppose it being promoted to FA if that was done. TJ Spyke 22:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Spyke, let me make my intent VERY clear: My intent is to end this discussion. You refuse to even answer a simple, common sense question. It doesn't matter to me what another article did with American. I can't see how any English speaker with enough of a command of the English language to read the article would not know what the United States is without yet another drop in the big blue sea of wikilinks to explain it to them. Do whatever you want with the article. I'm finished with it. Niteshift36 (talk) 23:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leg Show again

It looks like the section has been deleted again. I don't know the references for it, but if it could be found it should either be noted in early life or personal life. Sephiroth storm (talk) 01:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re-added. Next time, just go through the history to find what was deleted and the ref. Nikki♥311 02:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been removed again, it seems. It doesn't make me respect her any less, I'm just curious as to why people keep removing it if it's genuine.--68.111.242.222 (talk) 23:51, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested semi-protection

Since IP edits somehow deem her title defense again Alicia Fox at the Hell in a Cell PPV, I have requested temporary semi-protection to hopefully keep them at bay for awhile. ArcAngel (talk) 03:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Mickie James

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Mickie James's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "OWOW":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed something

Worst promotional etc it said BEING CALLED PIGGIE JAMES" i think this is wrong so i changed it too Being Exploited over weight issues by michelle McCool —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.55.214 (talk) 00:19, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 90.216.147.147, 11 August 2010

Mickie James recently has been realeast! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.216.147.147 (talk) 17:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

mickie james has retired for now and they dont know when she will com back they say that she retired for singing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.236.196 (talk) 01:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/\/\ Ummm no Mickie James is currently performing her craft on the independent scene. 91.105.2.169 (talk) 07:48, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for leaving WWE?

The wording of this article makes her departure from the WWE sound both abrupt and unexplained. However, and while I don't have evidence, I suspect it may have been due to her upcoming album release. It would appear that Maria left for this very reason and it would make sense if something similar occurred regarding Mickie. Perhaps someone who knows how to look into this kind of thing would be able to find actual information?--68.111.242.222 (talk) 10:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mickie_James&oldid=434910856"