Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2015 edit

It should be noted that after Stowman debuted on August 25, 2015, Bray Wyatt introduced him later in the evening as Braun Strowman. This is his new name. XanderNavajo (talk) 05:11, 25 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

  Not done. It is noted that he is apart of The Wyatt Family with his ringname in the infobox. Both have references. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 05:17, 25 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

HOF edit

Should we include the fact he will be in the Hall of Fame one day? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.15.238.49 (talk) 19:03, 25 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Only when he is selected as a HOF. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 19:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

STOWman edit

I am wondering if we can find some better sources for this spelling.

The template on the right mentions http://www.profightdb.com/wrestlers/braun-stowman-9702.html which I do not think is reliable, can't anyone edit that?

NXT section mentioning him competing under that name references http://www.wrestleview.com/wwe-news/52246-12-19-nxt-results-jacksonville-florida-tag-match but it is entirely possible they simply mistyped it, and that proFightDB might have mispelled the name based on WrestleView's mistake.

I am looking for a more primary source, like for example if there is a screenshot of his name spelled on-screen in NXT or audio from NXT of someone clearly saying "STOW" instead of "STROW" as Bray did recently. Ranze (talk) 15:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Bleacher Report has his name as Strowman. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2555058-braun-stowman-everything-you-need-to-know-about-newest-member-of-wyatt-family - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 15:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CdLurC-_Ws&t=1m9s Here. Strowman. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
YouTube is not a reliable source. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
That's the official WWE channel. It's reliable. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 16:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Why do you wanna know? what will you gain from it? TheHeelClub (talk) 04:11, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2017 edit

2605:6000:2207:900:9D30:B911:9B17:BBC7 (talk) 00:27, 27 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  shivam (t) 07:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2018 edit

Neymar3113 (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

braun

  Not done: as you have not requested a change.
Please request your change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Brains Strowman edit

please add “Brains Strowman” to Ring Names because he was called that Tonight. Here come “THAT WAS STROWMANS BROTHER” Comments. TheHeelClub (talk) 04:06, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Not done That section is not for listing every single silly name someone calls themselves, otherwise Goldust's would be a mile long. — Moe Epsilon 10:16, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

No I am bone123 (talk) 22:16, 30 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

That's unprofessional I am bone123 (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

But can we add his we add his second name (Joseph) I am bone123 (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Braun Strowman name change edit

Braun Strowman's name is Adam Scherr. Do we have you put in his second name (Joseph)? I am bone123 (talk) 11:48, 18 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Do you have a source? Sumanuil (talk) 22:20, 30 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Yes.I am bone123 (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Braun Strowman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 09:23, 23 June 2020 (UTC)Reply


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures edit

  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Links edit

Prose edit

Lede edit

General edit

GA Review edit

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Review meta comments edit

  • I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA and FA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definitely not mandatory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)
    • Sorry, I'm going to have to fail this one. In addition to the above issues, there's quite a bit that needs cleanup. For some examples:
  • Paragraphs are very long need splitting
  • OL
  • Needs more subsections
  • WP:PROSELINE - this is the biggest issue.
  • The personal life section is pretty pointless - either needs expansion or culling

If you can clear this stuff up, it'll be worth a second nomination. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:23, 2 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

gysufgdxf jzgkudnsfubjfxjklsbjdbukjj;,mfkljdfkjkfohllfgvanndnsrgxzdnjkbkugsakwfjsukj,ui hncyn8fvtithel5y76irddiafrtyugierjgingsrjke5jwhudmfi8gynveirbhidutd fhewjkuhfhk/dslhagioejg;kojgidrtsho;funvfdu;kh;afjmclkdjsgfhcnsmo;rstdgfkgihosiutlxfnlkhdlnslkjhgfcxzdftghjhgfdwertyuioiuytdsasdfhgfdsmkjhgfcxnbvcxcvbnbvcxzxcv bnmnbvcxzasdfghjkloiuytrew

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2022 edit

Scherr and Raquel aren't together anymore. This needs to be edited on this page. 2A00:23C5:ED23:FD01:B953:AA03:E72C:7E8 (talk) 13:17, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Reply