Category talk:Professional wrestling controversies

This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Professional wrestling Professional wrestling controversies 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 category 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.

RfC: Should this category contain biographies of individual persons?

Should individual biographies be included in this category?LM2000 (talk) 08:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No such inclusions potentially violate WP:BLPCAT, WP:COPDEF, MOS:LABEL, and WP:OPINIONCAT. While David Arquette in World Championship Wrestling is a controversy, David Arquette should not be. Furthermore, it seems like every subject that gets a Dark Side of the Ring episode is listed here. Consider making a separate category for topics of that show rather than listed them here; just because they were the focus of a TV show does not mean we should categorize them as controversial.LM2000 (talk) 08:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• @LM2000: I have pulled the {{rfc}} tag because there is no indication that WP:RFCBEFORE has been tried, let alone exhausted. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:50, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Yeah, this doesn't seem like an RfC subject, until regular discussion has been attempted and has failed to come to a clear resolution. Toward the end of reaching one, I agree entirely with LM2000's summary above of why individual bios do not belong in this category. If a category that could be categorized here has been relegate to a section at a bio, then the solution is to create a controversy redirect to that section and categorize the redirect here.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• No. A moment, incident, or event could be controversial, but we can't categorize the whole career of a person as professional wrestling controversy. A good example is Montreal Screwjob. Should we put Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, and Earl Hebner in this category? I don't think so. For individual persons, I suggest using a specific sub-category that is related to their case; e.g. Category:Professional wrestlers with chronic traumatic encephalopathy. --Mann Mann (talk) 10:02, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• No per the arguments above. Violates certain BLP policies and if the subject was actually controversial then there is likely to be a dedicated article for it (which can and should be listed under this category), such as David Arquette in World Championship Wrestling or Chris Benoit double-murder and suicide. — Czello ^(music) 10:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• No. A controversy is an event, not an individual or even a group. However, I understand the desire to categorise controversial moments from biographical pages. My suggestion would be that users should make use of the fact that redirects can be categorised and that users make redirects for specific controversies covered in biographical pages. For example, Category:Intentional communities in Ireland contains Achill mission colony. However, Achill mission colony is not an actual article, but a redirect to a subsection of Edward Nangle.
  So hypothetically, a user who wished to expand Category:Professional wrestling controversies could create a New Jack vs Vic Grimes as a redirect to New Jack#XPW Freefall incident with Vic Grimes and then place the New Jack vs Vic Grimes redirect into Category:Professional wrestling controversies. CeltBrowne (talk) 04:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]