Talk:Vince Russo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Location of birth and where he was raised
I don't know who the hell wrote this article, but vince russo was not born in brooklyn, nor was he raised there. He was raised in Long Island, New York a few blocks away from where fellow professional wrestling personality mick foley grew up. His "brooklyn" accent is entirely fake.
[edit] Hogan incident
Ive seen websites which say that the hogan incedent was staged. If so this is major breaking of the fourth wall.
- The truth is nobody knows. I've seen sites and articles that say: It was 100% staged, 100% real, and that it was a work shoot.
-
- Hogan sued Time Warner for break of contract. I think it was definatly a shoot.
-
-
- Hogan sued for defamation of character. The "laying down" of Jarrett was a work, but the comments afterwards were not cleared with Hogan, and that is where the lawsuit came into play. So it's really a little from column 'A' and a little from column 'B'.--193.113.48.11 12:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] DOB?
This article really needs Russo's date (or at least year) of birth. I realize how hard it can be with wrestling figures (as with actors) to get a "legit" DOB, but I hope that a major fan will really try.Rlquall 10:46, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Vince Russo actually stated on his website (that is no longer available) at ringofglory.com that Hogan and Vince Russo were in on the entire thing. However, he told Hogan to leave the arena afterwards. In addition, what exactly Russo stated may not have gone through with Hogan on the shoot afterwards. With the Internet blowing up afterwards, Hogan started to believe that he was screwed by Russo which later led him to file a "defamation of character" lawsuit, which he ended up losing.
Russo never hated Hogan, but he didn't call him back after that incident. The reason Hogan lost the lawsuit was because Russo never publically insulted Hogan outside of the ring and what happened during the Russo/Hogan incident at Bash At The Beach 2000 was all a work. Russo also stated that he never told Jeff Jarrett about it, so when Jeff entered the ring during the Hogan "match", Jeff wasn't "in" on the entire situation, while Hogan was.
[edit] A Mess
This article is seriously disjointed and jumps all over the place as it explains the role Russo has played in the WCW and beyond. This really needs to be cleaned up. Eric42 00:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
One year anniversary does not make sense. After a year or on the first anniversary would be better.12:27, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Too much opinion
Though I agree with the gist of most of this article, I disagree with some of the opinions that surface throughout the article. For example, I didn't find the Deadly Games tournament to be "a phenomenal show . . . that [has everything that] makes a story entertaining." I would say however, that it was the epitome of the "Crash TV" style developed in part by Vince Russo because of the many swerves. That's not to say that I thought the swerves were clever, I did not think them clever and I also thought the in ring story-telling suffered at the expense of the many plot twists (That's why I disagree with your "phenomenal" characterization).
I would also, generally disagree with your assessment of the Russo-era in WCW. In general, I thought Russo did a good job of bring life to company that couldn't come up with a new creative idea to save its life in the latter stages of Bischoff's nWo run. Though WCW never made a ratings resurgence, I don't believe Russo was responsible for the most damage. The credit for that goes to Bischoff, Hogan, Kevin Nash and Kevin Sullivan. I am personally of the opinion that Kevin Sullivan's post-Russo booking was what put the final nail in WCW's coffin.
I guess from an objective perspective, you can't really say Russo did a good job or a bad job creatively in WCW, but you can certainly say Russo's booking didn't win back the fans from WWE. Jamesrphillips 05:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Who are you speaking to exactly? Eric42 06:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I made the most recent edits, while I agree Russo didn't bring WCW back to glory, I do feel he made fundamental changes to Nitro to begin that process. But, as history notes, he only had 9 non-consecutive months as head booker. So I feel it should be noted that Russo at least attempted to kickstart WCW through the changes he made.
[edit] Russo & WWE Return (2002)
Hi all.
In my first *ever* Wikipedia entry, I've added a section from the book "The Death of the Wrestling Federation" speculating that he intentionally sabotaged his own operation in WWE, as he basically wanted to move to TNA all along (and used McMahon simply to 'buy him out' of his WCW/Time Warner contract).
Bear in mind that the book is touted to have taken direct quotes from backstage WWE employees, and it certainly seems to make the source credible - even if Russo himself was lying when he told it to them.
The book also has similar quotes regarding other wrestlers etc., which had previously not been reported.
I don't know if the section I added was entirely relevant (although I think it is), as I notice that a section speculating that Stephanie McMahon was the reason he left, was removed over the past few weeks.
[edit] Who is this?
"Challenged Hugo Leon for the "Cheaaaaap" World Title Belt (2005)"
This was listed under the "Championships and accomplishments" section. First, I have to question just who is Hugo Leon and what orginazation was this for? A search on google for the "Cheaaaap" World title brought nothing so I am confused. Also, did he win? If not, what makes this a notable accomplishment? I am thinking about deleting this for now. Eric42 20:10, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- LOL, you're an idiot. Its vandalism, doofus. The fact that you wrote an entry on the talk page about the "Cheaaap" title is hiliariously sad.64.12.116.138 21:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm... You are sad. I am causal editor just attempting to keep facts straight. Eric42 01:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- LOL, you're an idiot. Its vandalism, doofus. The fact that you wrote an entry on the talk page about the "Cheaaap" title is hiliariously sad.64.12.116.138 21:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] POV tag
I added the POV tag because quite frankly, this page is a mess with false and unverifyed information. Most of it is just a vehicle for Russo hate, and no hate or love should be shown on the page.
[edit] Does this need protection?
Checked the page just to note that there were a number of "additions" made that were basically just insults. How often is this happening? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thekithless (talk • contribs) 22:28, 12 February 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Too much opinion
'rediculous booking, bad storylines' saying that the Sting and Abyss storyline is rediculous, keyword 'rediculous'. Bias, and opinion. Remove them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.152.170.176 (talk) 01:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC).
it shoudl be noted that the crowd was chanting fire russo dorning the last rites match.
- If you can find a reliable source for that fact, maybe.--Nonpareility 00:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Is the PPV itself not a reliable source?--193.113.48.11 12:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- No, see Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ#Types_of_source_material. "Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand". Most "Wrestling News" sites are not reliable, either.--Nonpareility 14:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- This is bullshit. All I gotta do is just take the info from some fansite. Do people actually check wikipedia websites? this is why wikipedia sucks. everyone and their mother knows that the fans chanted for russo to be fired.
- Is the PPV itself not a reliable source?--193.113.48.11 12:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Wrestling news sites are usually opinion yet some authors it seems like to state their opinions as fact.
-
-
-
-
- Does anyone have any idea how the chant could be sourced? Surely there would be nothing else but a video, yet this can't be used? --SteelersFan UK06 19:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Find a reputable news site that mentions it. As mentioned, most "news" sites that would cover something like this are utter crap, but there must be some more reputable ones that have mentioned it..--Nonpareility 19:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- That's a crock of BS. That's like watching a live TV event where a sports player breaks his neck and the announcers say it as such, but it isn't considered fact until Sportscenter covers it. Wikipedia is an utter joke if you insist on this stupid rule holding up.75.66.232.217 23:17, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Find a reputable news site that mentions it. As mentioned, most "news" sites that would cover something like this are utter crap, but there must be some more reputable ones that have mentioned it..--Nonpareility 19:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Does anyone have any idea how the chant could be sourced? Surely there would be nothing else but a video, yet this can't be used? --SteelersFan UK06 19:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
You can clearly hear the chants on the PPV. If a football player audibly swore at a ref during a game, would this also need people to write about it?
- Yes, it would have to be written about by a reliable source to be included, though I wonder if such an incident (or indeed this one) would be notable enough to even mention. In fact, one of the guidelines of notability is whether any reliable source has mentioned it.--Nonpareility 03:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why does it have to be verified when 99% of Wikipedia doesn't have things that are verified. If more than three sources mention something, it doesn't have to verified.
- It's an official Wikipedia policy. If you disagree with the policy, you're free to go try to change it.--Nonpareility 16:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why does it have to be verified when 99% of Wikipedia doesn't have things that are verified. If more than three sources mention something, it doesn't have to verified.
I've just added the recent criticism and unhappiness coming out of the TNA locker room to this and the links to the anti-Russo Myspace page which is getting more and more popular by the second.--User:Rgp1 15:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- While your reference does show that an anti-Russo Myspace page exists, that really doesn't mean anything. I could go create a Myspace page that says Russo's the greatest, but that doesn't mean I could say "Because of Russo's brilliant writing, pro-Russo Myspace pages have been created in the hope of drawing enough publicity to give him more power in booking TNA shows".--Nonpareility 15:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I understand what you're saying mate but this is basically a snowball affect - wrestler unrest, fans chanting at the pay-per-view and now a movement (and I say a movement because that is exactly what it is, people bombarding TNA office with emails) on Myspace. Everyone knows how hated Russo is, I can't stand him, his ideas are very strange.--User:Rgp1 22: 54 27 March (UTC)
Russo does'nt book the shows as much as the fans think he does. They don't know a lick, and there all living in the past, their opinions and fat petitions are meaningless and futile, as their voices will not be (and deservedly at that) heard.
I hav'nt had a problem with Russo since he came back, and I liked a great deal of things he did in WCW (New Blood, Booker T's title reigns, Scott Steiner getting airtime to cut shoots, and Jarret's multiple title reigns). Unfortunatly, his other ideas were so overbearingly negative, objectivity has been thrown out of the window
Dr. R.KZ. 17:23 April 26th 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reliable sources
There's a lot of info on here, and I'm sure most of it's true, but almost none of it has any sources (reliable or otherwise) attached. At the moment I don't really care whether the sources are reliable - as long as a source is presented as news and not opinion. We'll sort out the reliable vs. not reliable thing afterwards.--Nonpareility 15:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you should take a look at Russo's book, and listen to the many interviews he has done with various wrestling journalists.
Why does it say that Russo did not get to write any of the early TNA shows when Jerry Jarrett said in his book that Russo wrote nearly all of them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misawaloveme (talk • contribs) 17:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Peer Review
Klichka asked for Vince Russo to be peer reviewed just over a week ago, here are suggestions that were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
- Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
- This article has no images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.[?]
- See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[?]
- Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
- Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.[?]
- There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Neldav 17:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inaccuracies
Whoever wrote that Vince Russo brought the ratings up in WCW is quite mistaken. There is a lot of evidence that shows that Russo caused the ratings to drop, and that Vince McMahon was actually the one who oveersaw Russo's work in the WWF; McMahon was the one, therefore, who caused the Raw ratings to increase, not Russo. Kevin j 16:59, September 15, 2007 (UTC)
Oh I agree with you that ratings didn't come up with Russo in WCW, but to say McMahon had the ideas you have to be out of your mind. The problem with Russo is he needs a filter on them, that's what McMahon was and he kept a lot of the bad ideas off the screen. Problem in WCW was his leaving and coming back and being given total control. With no control he let all his ideas out of the bag and that's what caused fans to leave. And to further prove the point go do some research on what Vince's ideas have done to WWF. Steamboat anyone? Or what about Bastion Booger? In fact I would say that when McMahon is left on his own, he is his own worst enemy. 71.224.110.27 03:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC) As a matter of fact it was Vince Russo who was resonsible for the defining storylines of the Attitude Era, storylines such as the Undertaker and Kane saga, DX, the creation of the Mr. McMahon character and of course the Austin/McMahon feud. He wrote the shows later along with Ed Ferrara , with 'some' over seeing of the work by McMahon. Probably should watch the Ultimate Insiders DVD with Wade Keller which reveals actions and happenings closer to the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.64.148 (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Russo and Ferrara were part of a team with Terry Taylor and Jim Cornette which was overseen by McMahon.And the Undetaker/Kane (who burnder down the funeral home?) was the most confusing, poorly written garbage he has ever come up with. And thats a high bar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Misawaloveme (talk • contribs) 22:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Where's WCW?
Where is the WCW section? The article completely skips over it!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.84.19 (talk) 04:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

