Backlash (2006) 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Professional wrestling#Disqualification|disqualification]] The anchor (#Disqualification) is no longer available because it was
deleted by a user before.
[[Professional wrestling#No contest|no contest]] The anchor (#No contest) is no longer available because it was
deleted by a user before.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Pre-GA Review
Lead
The reference for the PPV's theme song is indeed there, but I cannot find the tagline in that reference.
The main feud heading into Backlash was the Triple Threat match between John Cena, Triple H and Edge -- the main feud was a match? The main feud was between Cena, HHH, and Edge for the title. The words "the Triple Threat match" should be removed.
It culminated when Triple H won the number one contender spot to face WWE Champion John Cena at WrestleMania 22 -- should say The feud began when Triple H won the number one contender spot to face WWE Champion John Cena at WrestleMania 22
As WrestleMania took place, Cena defeated Triple H, when he made him submit to the STFU. -- should say At WrestleMania, Cena defeated Triple H, when he made him submit to the STFU. Only "when he made him submit to the STFU" bothers me as well. He and him should be specified, and it should be mentioned what the STFU is, even though it is wiki-linked.
Edge, in the beginning of 2006, became WWE Champion when he cashed in his Money in the Bank title shot at New Year's Revolution by giving Cena two Spears. -- should say Edge became WWE Champion at New Year's Revolution when he cashed in his Money in the Bank title shot. - the spear is not notable.
The part about that match says The next match was The Big Show versus Kane, which ended in a no-contest after a red hue covered the ring and voices from the speakers in the arena began taunting Kane with "May 19" and Big Show who seemed to have enough, hit Kane with a steel chair and walked away Nowhere in that does it explain why May 19th would taunt Kane. iMatthew200823:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Following the aftermath from Backlash, Kane was confronted by an Imposter Kane, who was wearing Kane's old mask and ring attire. the next sentence has a ref, The Impostor chokeslammed Kane during his match against Shelton Benjamin for the Intercontinental Championship.[36] but that is about the chokeslam. iMatthew200822:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)reply
It's ready! Feel free to give your one week warning to
WP:PW. iMatthew2008`
On review - Thursday
I will be reviewing this article on Thursday, sorry for the delay, ive been busy and dont like to review while im stressed out of respect to the editers. I will see you in two days. Cheers --
Realist2 (
Come Speak To Me)
23:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)reply
OK, im going to review it now, i add bits piece by piece, please DO NOT start making corrections until i have indicted that im finished. There is plently of time to get things sorted. Cheers.
Review
The "Report" heading seems pointless, that does it exactly mean any way, i think it would be best to turn the three subheadings into proper headings with == on either side.
The main feud was between John Cena, Triple H, and Edge for the WWE Championship. The feud began when Triple H won the number one contender spot to face WWE Champion John Cena at WrestleMania 22.[12] - can be joined to make one sentance, a little stuby
Weeks before their scheduled match, the two continuously feuded with one another.[13] - Feuded, that word doesnt sound right, im sure these a better word
Feuded is the correct word to use with professional wrestling slang.
This feud started on
December 262005, when Mr. McMahon made note of
Bret Hart's DVD and claiming that he "tricked" Hart in the hours of his match at
Survivor Series where he lost the WWE Championship to Shawn Michaels, after Michaels applied Hart's own finisher the
Sharpshooter and McMahon called for the bell, in an event known as the "
Montreal Screwjob" - sentance is too long, it needs spliting.
Then Mr. McMahon scheduled a match between him and Michaels, at WrestleMania 22, where the match would be a No Holds Barred match.[27] - over usage on the word match
Before the event started, Goldust defeated Rob Conway in a match that aired on HEAT. Goldust won the match after a powerslam.[29] - shouldnt this go in the background section?
Masters soon caught on, when he powerbombed Carlito into the turnbuckle. Carlito, however, came out on the winning end when he hit Masters with a Back Cracker and using the ropes for leverage.[30][31] - bring together as a single sentance
Next was a match between Umaga and Ric Flair. Throughout the match Umaga had the upper hand over Flair as he hit a knee to his head. He beat Flair when he hit the Samoan Spike for the win.[31][32] - stubby
The match started with Shawn Michaels crossbodying both Vince and Shane McMahon on the outside. - the outside of what?
Starting from The sixth match was the section is undersourced.
On the June 12 edition of Raw, McMahon booked Triple H in a Gauntlet match against the Spirit Squad. During the match, it saw Michaels return as part of the storyline. Triple H and Michaels would go on to reform their previous wrestling stable D-Generation X.[50] - join together, quite stuby
The "results" section is good, very well sourced however its set out wrong, it needs to be set into a written paragraph or made into some sort of table.
The LEAD is unnessarily sourced, make sure everything that is in the lead is also in the article, then source it in the article, thus you no longer need to source the LEAD.
The lead can be sourced, or it can't be. It doesn't matter at all. If something is in the lead and not in the article, it will be sourced in the lead. If not, it is removed, or sourced. KingiMatthew200801:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)reply
OK, those are the points i see off hand, also make sure that all stuby sentances are improved and all long sentances are split. Remove all repeat wikilinking. I also think the article user the wrestlers names to often, sometimes swop the name with he/she so long as the sentance still makes sense.
OK, do all that and call me back. Ive put it on hold to let you complete this lot. If you need more than 7 days let me know and ill extend it somewhat. When im called back ill go through it again and hopefully it should by then read perfectly. Cheers.
Realist2 (
Come Speak To Me)
00:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)reply
OK, the article passes, sources are reliable and all work, no original research. Pictures are all free with suitable captions. The article is both Neutral and Stable. Its broad without going off the point. My only concern is for the pros, which while not excellent, should satisfy the requirements of GA.
Realist2 (
Come Speak To Me)
15:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)reply
I didn't see the link before it. Whoops... (BTW, is she in the category of people that can crack walnuts with their buttocks? :))--
andreasegde (
talk)
14:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Could someone?
Could someone please review Backlash, and tell me if it's well written, because I want to nominate it for FA, but I don't think it's that good enough to be an FA. So could someone please read it, and give me a comment on my talk page. Thanks. SaveUs.Y2J 7:10, January 6, 2009
Backlash featured professional wrestling matches that involved different wrestlers from pre-existing scripted feuds, plots, and storylines that were played out on Raw. Wrestlers portrayed a villain or a hero as they followed a series of events that built tension, and culminated into a wrestling match or series of matches.[1] All wrestlers were from WWE's Raw brand — a storyline division in which WWE employees are assigned to a television program of the same name.[2]
They are subtly different. This is how it was written in 2 other PPV articles that reached FA, so that's why it was recommended in the FAC review to use it here. TJSpyke00:44, 12 February 2009 (UTC)reply
I have just modified 2 external links on
Backlash (2006). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified 2 external links on
Backlash (2006). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified 2 external links on
Backlash (2006). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.