Talk:Professional Wrestling

RAW roster section

It needs lulzy thumbnails of wrestlers in their respective sections. A mugshot is fine too. Hitmonchan 20:54, 22 May 2012 (EDT)

wtf

seriously this article is horrendously gay, cant someone tone down the porn gif and add something that is actually related to wwe.1234stare 18:29, 7 June 2012 (EDT)

The article says "Professional Wrestling", you illiterate wigger. Are your lil Jimmies rustled? Hitmonchan 00:01, 8 June 2012 (EDT)

Unused Images

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

- Mr.Jonzz 01:57, 9 February 2013 (EST)

this article

Sucks so much ass that I can't tell which is gayer, wrestling or ED's article about wrestling. I'm going to completely rewrite this from start to finish. If anyone objects you got 2 weeks to speak up. -Uberfukken 11:50, 21 August 2013 (EDT)

• I liked HundredYearsFlameWar's edition in ED 1.0 much better than this one. This article's too WWE-centric. Hitmonchæn 19:04, 5 September 2013 (EDT)

Thank you I will look for it -Uberfukken 19:10, 5 September 2013 (EDT)

I object. Your efforts are wasted here on ED. Rather than fixing this article, you should take on wrestling IRL and rewrite it instead.--Paul Atreides 20:27, 5 September 2013 (EDT)

Also regarding WWE, this article needs moar pandas. And SOME mention of how the (former) World Wrestling Federation got pwned, raped, and forced to surrender all rights to their trademark by a bunch of dainty Swiss environmentalists. And to this day, continue to act like a little bitch about it. [1] [2] [3]

--Paul Atreides 20:42, 5 September 2013 (EDT)

I object to your objection. The article reads "Professional Wrestling", not "WWE". The latter redirects here. I mentioned the ED 1.0. version of the article because the original author actually had the decency of covering both WWE and (then) non-WWE or former WWE employees. Hitmonchæn 21:11, 5 September 2013 (EDT)