Talk:In Your House 1

Is it really necessary to include multiple repetitions of the well-known fact that professional wrestling is scripted in every PPV article? What relevance does that have to *this event*, or any *particular event*, as opposed to discussing it in the main p-w article?

I'm not the least bit interested in starting some stupid revert war over it, nor am I interested in wasting several hours going through every single PPV article to eliminate these constant 'reminders,' but here's a tip for whoever's responsible: it comes off as pedantic, condescending, uninformative, argumentative, provocative, and pointless...and certainly not 'encyclopedic.'

Rasslin's "fake." We know. It's really not necessary to remind people in every PPV article, and doing so gives the impression that the writer (or WP at large) thinks their readers are blithering idiots. -- lowgenius -- My Talk Page 04:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I personally agree with you. Some members of the wrestling project though think that wrestling articles have to be even more strict than any other articles. It's totally stupid IMO (same with writing "picked his opponent up by the throat and slammed the onto the mat" instead of just writing "chokeslammed his opponent"). TJ Spyke 04:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

(nod) I've avoided editing PW articles because I'm well aware of some of the silly drama that's been involved, but this really isn't about wrestling - it's about not writing like a buffoon. There are dozens of places in just this one article that are making my head hurt.

Just as a f'rinstance, "During a promotional interview with Vince McMahon, the WWF Chairman, Sid, in what was a work (a scripted moment made to look real)..." Okay, I can dig explaining what a work is, not everyone is going to know that. What I don't get is a) why explain it in the same sentence, immediately after a *hyperlink that takes you to a whole page explaining what a work is*, and b) why even mention that it's a work? Of course it's a work, it's on a flippin' PPV. If it's on TV, it's a work, period, save for exceptional situations (i.e. Owen Hart's death). Anyone who doesn't understand that can readily find that information (or should) in the main PW article. This doesn't need to be pointed out; it's like saying "The sun (which is a large yellow star that projects light and heat throughout its local planetary system) is hot and bright." Same with including real names in parentheses after every wrestler's name (and hilariously in this article, "Tatanka" (Tatanka)). It's like hypertext doesn't exist or something.

I don't mean to be a jerk (it just comes naturally, badumpbump), but reading this article is pretty embarrassing; it looks like it was written by a fifth-grader trying to pad his word count for an assignment. "Spongebob Squarepants is an animated character who is fictional, created by writers (that is to say, there really isn't a talking yellow sponge that lives in a pineapple under the sea)."

It's embarrassing as a wrestling fan, as someone who was in the business (by rights I probably ought to have my own WP page, but I'm not gonna write one myself and nobody else has bothered), and most importantly as a fellow wikipedia editor. I'm not sure what kind of silly "power" structure is involved here, but if this is the result it's time to step aside and take some remedial English Comp. classes.

no skin off my nose regardless - I have no horse in this race, and I'm not interested in having one - but it seems like a crime of omission to not point it out once. -- lowgenius -- My Talk Page 05:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Is the succesion box at the bottom really needed? It doesn't really add anything. There is already the PPV succession in the infoxbox, and a link back to the main IYH article. TJ Spyke 23:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I was thinking of the navboxes for the big four but since these are less related, succession boxes seemed the next step down. It's a bad idea and I have removed it. Sorry for the inconvenience. --Aaru Bui ^DII 23:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I will be reviewing this article for GA status. So far, it passe the quickfail criteria, so a full review is forthcoming. If you have any questions, you may contact me at my talk page. Regards, FamicomJL 21:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

1. MoS and prose PASS Prose looks fine, so does everything else. Only thing I don't like is the double use of the same sentence..."The PPV received a 0.83 buyrate, equivalent to about 332,000 buys.[4]"

The same sentence is also in the "aftermath" section. I suggest one of the two is removed, or merged into the other.

2. Factual accuracy and verifiability WEAK PASS There is a very low amount of sources...although they are pretty reliable. Only one I have any sort of issues with is the 411mania one, which is not a RS, but having it and a RS citing something does work out. A lot of the stuff in the background section alone isn't sourced enough.

3. Broadness of coverage PASS Very well done. I can see a lot of research was done. I never knew of the Wrestling Challenge thing you mentioned at all, so that's pretty cool.

4. Neutrality PASS Definite pass. No netruality issues here.

5. Stability PASS No edit wars recently, no vandals recently, very stable article.

6. Images PASS Both images have their proper fair use rationale.

7. Overall, this article definitely passes for a Good Article. If you want this to be featured however, much more reliable sources are citations are going to be needed. That, and some of the wrestling terms may be in the article a bit much. And the buyrates thing should be explained more thoroughly. Congratulations on a job well done, but this article has a long way to go to be featured. I would love to see it happen! Please feel free to ask me a question on my talkpage if you have any questions. FamicomJL 00:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

 

Image:In Your House Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

The subtitle, Premiere, where is that coming from? Was it ever used in any official literature as the subtitle of the show? If not it needs to be made lowercase or put in parenthesis or something to note that that's not the official name of the show. Also, the images of Sid and Bret have got to be 10 years later. I realize they're free, but since the article is about the show specifically perhaps an actual screenshot or two can be used instead with the non-free use rationale stating that they are only used in this article.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 15:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

You have raised two very good points there. Having not watched wrestling then, my answer may not be correct. Anyway, from the reports I've read and stuff, I think it was referred to as "I Your House: Premiere" and "the premiere of In Your House" in TV broadcasts. I'm not 100% sure, but I think it "Premiere" was the subtitile. In later IYH events, they used things like "It's Time", "International Incident", "A Cold Day in Hell" etc, I think they used Premiere here, as it was, well the premiere. Onto your second point, I don't own the video, but might find some screenshots off YouTube videos. Would one of the house they gave away be OK? Davnel03 20:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Before Wikipedia, I never saw the name "In Your House: Premiere". Most sites I see (including this review of the VHS tape [1]) just say "In Your House #1" or something similar. It doesn't help that all of the early IYH posters were generic (it was the same thing, only the date was changed). TJ Spyke 21:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I forgot these aren't on DVD. I guess digitized video is going to have to be the best we can hope for, but hopefully without a watermark on it. As for the subtitle, I'd never seen it before Wikipedia either. I'd check WWE.com, but they have no history before 2002.«»bd(^talk _stalk) 04:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Doing a google search of "In Your House 1 Premiere" gets you this to do with wrestling an nothing else. As a result of that and above comments, I have MOVED it to "In Your House 1". Davnel03 19:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Having watched at the time, I can positively state that no IYH during the year 1995 had a subtitle, only numbers. The first IYH to have a subtitle was #7 (Good Friends...) Subtitles to the preceding events were added only in retrospect, sometimes based on taglines or mottos published at the time of the event. But #1 never had any addition. Str1977 ^(talk) 19:00, 25 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

The main feud heading into the first-ever In Your House PPV was between WWF Champion Diesel and the challenger for the title, Sycho Sid. The fact that it was the first-ever has been overstated already. Don't worry about it. Readers found out it was the first-ever when they checked the lead paragraph. Now, I would word the first sentence differently; The largest blockbuster feud was between then-WWF Champion Diesel and Sycho Sid. Don't even bother mentioning that Diesel was champ and Sid was his title challenger. Don't even bother to say he was a challenger. That becomes clear when you read it.

Changed. Davnel03 17:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

At WrestleMania XI, Diesel had defeated Shawn Michaels to retain the WWF Championship.[7]No. you started good in the last sentence, working up the feud. Now you jump to Shawn Michaels.

I've actually changed it to "At the previous pay-per-view, WrestleMania XI,", because I haven't introduced WrestleMania XI. By putting "the previous pay-per-view", they now know what type of event it was, before they would have to guess whether it was on TV or PPV. Davnel03 17:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

On RAW the night after WrestleMania XI, Michaels told Sycho Sid, his bodyguard, not to show up for the rematch as his services were no longer required.[1] Ok, this took some detective work. I NOW understand that the HBK-Diesel feud is leading somewhere. the link to Sid is opening up, A LITTLE. What you might want to say is that in the aftermath of a feud between HBK and Diesel, which ended with a championship win for Diesel at Wrestlemania, the WWF had planned to book a rematch between the two for a later time. In the meanwhile, before a second tumultous feud between the two, Sid Sycho, who in storyline was a maniacal bodyguard protecting HBK, embroiled in a minor feud with his former boss. During an interview with Michaels by Vince McMahon, Sid, in what...CONTINUE, But Keep Focus on the Sid-Diesel Feud

Made some minor changes. Davnel03 17:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

While Michaels was interviewed by Vince McMahon, however, Sid, in what was a work (a scripted moment made to look real), interrupted and turned on Michaels, Powerbombing him three times.[1] This is getting fuzzy. Be direct and don't worry about the "however" here. It might help to explain that why, in the storyline, Sycho Sid began to do this. Was he jealous? Was he crazy? What storylines are involved with the sudden turn? Did it relate to HBK saying that his services were no longer required, hinting that Sid felt that he had outlived his usefulness as a bodyguard?

I think it related to Michaels comment about the services no longer being required. I've removed "however" and made a further change to the beginning of the sentence. Davnel03 17:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

The Diesel eventually came out to help Michaels,[1][8] but Michaels was legitimately injured.[1][9]Bad. Eventually? Came out? legitimately injured? What you are trying to say that Diesel, in a show of respect for the former champion, came to his defense at the ring, RIGHT? By saying "BUT", you are hinting that HBK's legit injury in some way opposed or was in spite of his help. Break it up.

I've removed the stupid "but", and have broken the sentence into two. Davnel03 17:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

This sidelined him for six weeks, effectively shelving plans for a rematch between Diesel and Michaels.[10]Perfect. this is a thought. this is the stuff that makes a FA. Most wrestling contributors wouldn't add a detail like this. This is good, but you could tie it in directly, rather than leaving hints as to why this may have led to a Sid-Diesel feud.

Thanks! I'll leave it as it is (for the moment at least). Davnel03 17:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Diesel was then scheduled to defend his title against Bam Bam Bigelow, a member of the Million Dollar Corporation stable, after a staged confrontation between the two on the 16 April 1995 edition of Action Zone.[11] On the same day, on Wrestling Challenge, in a segment featuring the Corporation, Bigelow was noticeably snubbed, signaling a turn.[11]Snubbed? Huh? And what is Action Zone anyway? What you are trying to say is that a minor feud between Bigelow and Diesel was pulled.

Nope, it wasn't pulled. The match took place on the 24th April edition of RAW. Thats the bit you mention below. What I mean by snubbed is that the Corporation were basically ignoring him. Action Zone by the way is similar to say Heat/Velocity. Davnel03 17:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

It was announced over the weekend of 16 April that Sid would face Diesel at In Your House, whether Diesel retained or dropped his title against Bigelow.[11] Ok, so it was announced. It sounds like it was a surprise; that is another fact to put in; that IT WAS a surprise. Also, the fact that he would face Diesel regardless of whether he lost the championship to Bigelow is a little hard-to-follow. Say that a match was announced for the two At Your House, where Sid could potentially face Diesel for the WWF Championship.

I've changed it, but I feel like I've made it even harder to follow! What do you think? Davnel03 17:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

On the 24 April edition of RAW, Sid stated he was unhappy about this, as it meant that if Bigelow won, Sid would not get a shot at the title. Ok, so...? throw in something; a threat or an alliance with Bigelow, or something to mess up Bigelow, maybe? The fact that he was unhappy was an emotional change? did he have a moody, violent episode? Did he express great interest in the title? Why is this relevant?

I'm not going to change it, however, the shows were only one hour back then. According to this, (one of the sources used), the Main Event started twenty minutes into the show and lasted until the end of the show. Anyway, I'm going to give the website quote that they have for the segment. Here ya go:

QUOTE :From that, Todd segues abruptly into posing the question: Is Sid happy? Before we can even ask what kind of question that is, we cut to Sid. Sid doesn't answer the question as such, but does say something about how "the master" will not be happy until Sid is WWF champ. Answering the next unasked question, Sid states that with regard to tonight's match, he has "friends in low places". I don't quite catch his meaning, but if I were Bam Bam, I'd check under the ring before the match, just to be sure.

If I should change it, what should I change it too? Davnel03 17:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Later in the show, Diesel retained the title when the Corporation turned on Bigelow, with Tatanka tripping Bigelow as he ran off the ropes. Diesel performed a big boot, followed by a Powerbomb for the win.[12]Ok. I can't bust your balls on this one. EXCEPT that you said "later in the show..." That means that the fact that Sid expressed UNHAPPINESS was the important segment, and later, Diesel just so happened to retain his title? By wording the two in that order, you give Sid's unimportant fact more weight than it needs.

Removed "Later in the show". Thanks again! Davnel03 17:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

After the contest, DiBiase insulted Bigelow, who was then attacked by the Corporation until Diesel came to Bigelow's aid.[6][13][14] Not bad. Exemplary referencing, but it seems a bit shocking. Bigelow was In DiBiase's stable, right? Maybe your confusing "snubbed" statement could help explain this. Also, don't stress the fact that he was attacked by the Corp UNTIL Diesel came to his aid. Mention the pummelling, the beating, and then make a new sentence saying that Diesel, who had been celebrating, or who had returned to the locker room, or the backstage, THEN came to his aid. the word UNTIL places too much on the waiting and the duration. Just mention the events, and relationships between wrestlers.

Changed a bit. Davnel03 17:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

In Sid's match with Razor Ramon on the 1 May edition of RAW,[12] Diesel approached the ring, at which point Sid, along with DiBiase, left the arena.[13][15]what was DiBiase doing there? Why did Diesel approach the ring? Because he was ready to fight Sid, right? cover the fundamental relationships, and the facts will come into place. Remember, that is what will seperate your article from something hoffed up from World of Wrestling's feud timelines.

Split into two sentences to cover the two facts. The first sentence states that Diesel walks towards the ring, with the second stating that Sid and DiBiase leave the arena. Davnel03 17:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

The following week on RAW, DiBiase announced that he and Sid had been working together for a while, admitting that it was him who told Shawn Michaels to get a bodyguard.[16] they didn't announce, they REVEALED their hidden relationship. This works counter-intuitively, though. diBiase told him to get a bodyguard? And not being HBK's bodyguard made Sid unhappy? How was DiBiase involved in a dark operation? Did this hint that DiBiase convinved Michaels to take sid, and then Sid turned on him?

Um. I've changed it from "announced" to "revealed". As for the rest of it though, I don't exactly want to put those words in the article, for instance "HBK's bodyguard made Sid unhappy", because we don't know that. We can guess that, but we don't know it for definite. Davnel03 18:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

--Screwball23 talk 02:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Big thanks, Screwball! :) Davnel03 18:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

IYH did not do 332,000 buys. That website is wrong to imply that 1.0 buyrate corresponds to 400,000 buys over time. Buyrates correspond to the size of the PPV universe at the moment the event is ordered, and that number changes from month to month. Wrestlemania III (André-Hogan) had a 10.2 buyrate. By that metric, Wrestlemania III would have had around 4,000,000 buys. But that's an absurd number on the surface. In truth, Wrestlemania III did around 400,000 buys because the size of the PPV universe was much smaller in 1987 compared to 1995 compared to 2000 as compared to today. ~ fnpmplf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fnpmplf (talk • contribs) 12:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

It is worth noting that Wrestlemania XI (held that year) did 340,000 buys and Wrestlemania XII, held the following year, did 290,000 buys. So you mean to say that the first In Your House, headlined by Sid and Diesel (neither of whom were known to be draws in 1995), outdrew Wrestlemania XII by a significant margin but drew just under Wrestlemania XI, an event that had a lot of mainstream coverage? C'mon. Think. I do think the 194,000 estimation seems much more reasonable, though you need a better source since that source seems to indicate a flimsy computation. Either way, there is no way IYH drew 332,000 buys. That's just retarded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fnpmplf (talk • contribs) 12:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on In Your House 1. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wwf/wwfppvbr.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070624163848/http://www.wwe.com:80/shows/summerslam/history/1995/mainevent/ to http://www.wwe.com/shows/summerslam/history/1995/mainevent/

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on In Your House 1. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.otherarena.com/htm/cgi-bin/history.cgi?1995%2Fraw040395
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.otherarena.com/htm/cgi-bin/history.cgi?1995%2Fraw042495
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.otherarena.com/htm/cgi-bin/history.cgi?1995%2Fraw050195
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://otherarena.com/htm/cgi-bin/history.cgi?1995%2Fraw050895
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://otherarena.com/htm/cgi-bin/history.cgi?1995%2Fraw041095
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071030175209/http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/wweppv/kingofthering95.html to http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/wweppv/kingofthering95.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wwe.com/shows/summerslam/history/1995/mainevent/

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:30, 9 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on In Your House 1. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205135118/http://www.oowrestling.com/columns/ooldtyme/20040901.shtml to http://www.oowrestling.com/columns/ooldtyme/20040901.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080607173211/http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/raw/_1995/ to http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/results/raw/_1995/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081010114133/http://www.wwe.com/shows/wrestlemania/history/wm11/mainevent/ to http://www.wwe.com/shows/wrestlemania/history/wm11/mainevent/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051001091947/http://www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/worldtagteam/30445413212114 to http://www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/worldtagteam/30445413212114

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)Reply