Jump to content

Talk:CM Punk/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Image above statistics vandalism?

Someone had put an image of Chris Masters at the Tribute to the Troops '06, probably vandalism?

TNA and ROH

Punk was only in TNA for a short time, where as he was a big part of ROH. Could somebody please devide them into two seperate sections? Kris_Classic

What about MWF

What about his time in Maniac Wreslting Federation? Someone add this please

Most of his stuff isn't covered because it isn't notable, if you look at his championships there are many listed that aren't even referenced because his only real notable federations are IWA:MS, RoH, TNA and ECW. Arguably his time in Full Impact Pro could be added but beyond that nothings really more notable. --- Lid 18:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

HE DID NOT LOSE HIS OVW TITLE

He lost his WWE title shot against Rey which is what he and Seth were wrestling for. HE DID NOT LOSE HIS OVW BELT HE IS STILL OVW CHAMPION. This needs to be changed...


Backyard

No mention of his time in the Lunatic Wrestling Federation before he turned pro?

Feel free to add info on his backyard wrestling days if you have it.
↪Lakes (Talk) 19:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Not to refute that LWF was a backyard promotion, but the reason given for it being one in the latest revision is totally inaccurate. Lots of independent promotions only use local guys and no fly-ins, doesn't make them yarders. --David Bixenspan 15:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I was in the Chicago area around the time LWF was big in the Chicago scene. I never attended a show but would listen to their hypeline occasionally. There is a good chance that they may have been a legit fed for a while since they ran shows out of a park district. Here is some more info from 411mania

"Billy Whack chimes in on some C.M. Punk lore…My name is Billy Whack, and I used to own and promote the Lunatic Wrestling Federation in Chicago. (1993-2004)

.... And I'll never forget the day we came up with "Punk" also... It was a rainy day at All American Comics, where I worked...And I had invited a 14 year old Phil Brooks (a regular at the shop) to hang out with us over the weekend and maybe referee one of our backyard matches. (The LWF was "backyard" from 93-97, and legit thereafter) He asked to "wrestle", and I suggested he be a heel version of the 123 Kid. (93, remember?) We would simply call him--"The Punk." and we did, till about 1996." ([1])

Maybe there are some other people from the area who know better. I'm sure when Punk was in it it was backyard for most of the time...

--RedBirdI55 18:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


Anyone know what his OVW Theme song is?

He uses the AFI song he used in ROH 216.163.119.10

Requested move

Phil Brooks → CM Punk – Has gone by the name CM Punk since at least the age of 17, and even in shoot interviews refers to himself as Punk. Punk also views negatively people who refer to wrestlers by their real name rather than ring name, though doesn't mind if you know the real name. Also seems to be supported by WP:NAME. --- Lid 03:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Comment: It hasn't been acknowledged as an abbreviation publicly after his backyard wrestling days.
↪Lakes (Talk) 07:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Punk doesn't have a career outside of wrestling and refers to himself as Punk outside of wrestling even though he doesn't really follow kayfabe that much. --- Lid 00:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but what I was referring to was not careers outside of wrestling, rather the focus of the discussion. Phil Brooks is the man's name; C.M. Punk is the wrestling character he plays. The article is not actually about C.M. Punk, it's about Phil Brooks. So, it should stay under Phil Brooks. Tuckdogg 01:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Reply: The Rock is borderline, since he has actually been using "The Rock" regularly as a stage name since retiring (although he seems to be moving towards Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson now...). The rest should all be moved to their real names. Really, though, you can't just link to some of the wrestlers' pages and say "These guys are indexed under their real names, so we should move this guy, too!" I'd be willing to bet that every one of those pages has a "Move this page" debate ongoing, as do all the pages of wrestlers indexed under their real names (which, to be honest, is a much larger list). I think what really needs to be done here is to get down a specific policy for how to treat wrestlers, and then stick to that unless there's a compelling reason not to (e.g. Chris Jericho should probably be indexed under Jericho regardless of any policies, since he owns the name and uses it as a stage name in a variety of contexts outside of wrestling). Tuckdogg 14:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. FPAtl (holla) 04:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Everyone calls him Punk, in shoot interviews and otherwise. "CM" is not really an abbreviation, either, and is the official spelling of his name (check ECW.com for support).

Discussion

Add any additional comments
The nominated move was approved 06:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC). Please do not alter archived discussion.
↪Lakes (Talk) 11:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: No offense, Lid, but when we're in the middle of discussing page moves, AND right in the middle of hammering out a policy of how to properly index wrestlers on WP:PW:Talk, it's not really cool to move pages around. You could have at least waited until the policy was decided. Tuckdogg 13:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Regardless of what RM says about when a move can take place, that doesn't necessarily mean that a move is the wise decision in the middle of a policy debate on a related page that, depending on how it is resolved, could cause your move to be reverted. I would think it wiser to resolve the policy debate first, then work on moving pages. Tuckdogg 21:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

CM Punk or Punk, CM?

There is some debate over whether CM Punk counts as a ring name ala the Ace Crusader or if it's a first name last name ala C.W. Anderson. It's known CM stands for Chick Magnet, making it Chick Magnet Punk. Should it be listed as CM being the dominant part in an alphabetical listing, or the Punk being the dominant? --- Lid 09:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not like Punk is a last name, so CM Punk, not 'Punk, CM'.
↪Lakes (Talk) 13:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Well it's not a first/last name deal OR an abbreviation. The origins of a name are different from the identity of a name, it does not currently stand for anything. If it did, it would be spelled "C.M. Punk" instead of "CM Punk."

Face or Heel?

Is Punk a face or a heel? I don't get it. --Ed-kipedia 02:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

He's whichever you want him to be. --- Lid 08:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Devil Lock or Devilock?

Recently I have come to realise that Punk's move, currently listed as the Devil Lock may in fact be a reference to The Misfits song and hairstyle, Devilock. Punk has always had an affinity for the Misfits however Devil Lock would make more sense grammatically. Any opinions? --- Lid 12:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


Pepsi Tattoo & WWE music

His Pepsi tat currently has Hart foundation style wings coming off it, and during both promos "This Fire Burns" by Killswitch Engage has played. I think this might be his WWE music.

And your point please

Signature Moves List

The signature moves list is way too long. It looks to me like a fan of his just made a giant list of all the moves hes ever done. Signature moves, by definition, are special moves that are done frequently by workers in almost every match. It looks like someone just added every move CM Punk has ever done to that list. Can we cut it down? He doesn't need 1,000 holds like Dean Malenko. 65.30.40.87 13:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Most of it came from Punk's website with a few exceptions from OWW and observation, but i'll see what I can remove --- Lid 14:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Unused Photo

I just wanted to point out that I found a photo on Wikipedia of CM Punk that isn't being used: File:Cmpunkwwe.jpg SilentRAGE! 03:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone changed the TNA profile image to that once but it was changed back because despite what it claims that's an image of Punk in RoH, not WWE. Punk has never had blonde hair in WWE. Due to that the TNA one was put back in as it's a better profile image and higher quality, and as the image illustrates nothing of importance it's left out of the article. --- Lid 03:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Then doesn't it need to be deleted if it's not in use? I was pointing it out, just incase somebody needed to use it or not. SilentRAGE! 09:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The picture is verry pixleated.....Please get new pic.Perferably a pic of him in his white outfit in the extreme elimation chamber

Passed GA

This article is comprehensive, well-illustrated well-sourced and fairly readable. While I wish it weren't so heavily reliant on the one wrestling site, it at least cites it frequently. I consider it a Good Article. Good job, editors.

It could be a featured article, if more diverse sources were found, there was more info on his personal life and history outside of wrestling, some sections were moved around and some rough spots in the prose cleaned up. Keep at it. Daniel Case 03:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


New Picture?

I've noticed that most, if not all, of the Wiki articles on current WWE wrestlers have a current WWE picture (whether it be a publicity still from their website, or a picture from their house shows) in their infobox. Should the Punk picture be changed to a current WWE still? PunkCabana 21:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

A WWE picture was tried at one point, but it didn't scale down or whatever as good as the current one does. And just my opinion, but there's probably not a better picture to use. The current one is really good. Calaschysm 22:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. I read a little disclaimer thing while going in to make a few edits saying not to replace the image anyway. PunkCabana 00:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Finisher Move

Considering the Fact in ECW(WWE) he has still not used Pepsi Plunge shouldn't his Ura-nage(Side Slam) be move up towards a finisher

That is against the policies of the wrestling wikiproject, moves are not degraded. The ura-nage has never been used to finish the match, only to set up the finisher, thus it is a signature move and not a finisher in itself. –– Lid(Talk) 02:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Still. It ought to be made notable that the ura-nage slam is more than just another move he frequently uses. He sets up his finishers with it. I'm not saying to put it up to finisher status. I'm saying that if I were trying to edit it right now, I'd move it higher on the list of signature moves than all of the moves he hasn't given a name (and possibly some of the ones he has). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.165.158.168 (talk)
Moves are in alphabetical order. Named signature moves are placed above unnamed signature moves. It's unnamed and starts with 'u.' That's why it's at the bottom of the list. Calaschysm 07:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Too many references

What's with all the references? Every other sentence has one. Not every match result needs a link. Comprehensive is cool, but this is going overboard. It makes editing hard. I think most of them should be removed. Maestro25 23:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It really doesn't make editing hard, but whatever. If you want to take the references down, feel free to do so. I personally feel it would cheapen a good article, so I won't take any down. Calaschysm 00:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with that there are too many references. We're talking about a fairly new wrestler who has a cult following of a few hundred fans. It does make it really hard to edit, and it isn't necessary to have 80 references (most of which are websites anyway) for someone like this. 69.209.113.141 22:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree that there are too many references.67.86.149.41 07:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

If the references are good, then there is no such thing as too many. -- THL 07:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC) I'm so glad alot of the references have been taken down. Alot of them were week-by-week results and fairly annoying. 124.187.70.151 01:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, if they were w-b-w results then yeah, they were bad. Disregard my last statement. -- THL 01:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

WHAT HAPPENED

What happened to the page? It looks so...empty.--989 RVD 21:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It was vandalized; I fixed it. -- THLCCD 21:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalized as "Drunk"

I'm reporting this that 202.89.150.42 has vandalized CM Punk's profile as Drunk. Someone please warn him? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CM_Punk&action=history --Dekabreak101 21:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

See WP:DENY. Cheers, -- THLR 02:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice Try

I don't know who wants or feels CM Punk is an atheist but I haven't found any evidence to support this and that also doesn't really fit with any straight edge type of thing. I don't think he belongs in that category until real supporting evidence is provided. I know for some it's "cool" these days but some stranger doesn't have the right to say what religion some other person follows. I mean I could go change the Marilyn Manson page to make him a Muslim and who knows what he really follows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.233.167.166 (talk)

To quote his LiveJournal: "There is no god, and the cage wasn't 30 feet." It wouldn't have stayed on this page so long if someone was just making it up. Calaschysm 10:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

So that alone makes him atheist, I guess it's not really a battle worth fighting since none of us really know him and the definition of atheist is not very definite, some atheists still believe in spirits and what not. He is a good wrestler, I can say that much.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.233.167.166 (talk)

He is in fact an atheist, although I am not really sure if he has any side beliefs or whatever. I guess you would have to know him personally to figure that out. As far as the Marilyn Manson thing goes, let's just say he studied theater very well in school. RankRabbit 19:27, 12 December 2006

If he says that he is an atheist, then who are we to question? -- THL 01:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

AGAIN! We're using one quote which doesn't sound like he was speaking in all seriousness to automatically assume that he is atheist. Obviously he's gone on wild tangents before. Not only has he not exactly said outright "I am atheist", or "I don't believe in God or anything like that", but mentioning that "there is no god" while in the same short sentence talking about a steel cage doesn't exactly seem to be concise proof to me. It sounds more like a ranting comment than proof of anything. 172.161.72.39 18:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow someone else supports me on this one and now that I think about it why don't I slap a big AMERICAN CHRISTIANS on say Bobby Lashley because I saw him bow his head in a public prayer once. Isn't that legit? I'm sure I could find the television footage and isn't that just as good as a quote? I'm starting to lose faith in wikipedia for providing accurate information, it's most obviously not fact. Why don't we put Atheist on Trent Reznor, because he isn't one but he has made songs that may suggest that. Another example is Woody Allen, people say he's an atheist but not too long ago I heard him talking about his religious practices that he still does, for those who don't know he's jewish. I don't think it's right to put someone in this category unless we have solid proof of this. The bot can slap the sig on here, bye

Well, the bot won't always slap sigs on, so always sign your comments. Now, to return to the discussion, you make a good argument, and I will remove him from the category. Also, you should never trust a Wikipedia biography on a living person, as we have so many rules to follow that it is almost impossible to get them completely accurate. However, everything else is reliable. -- The Hybrid 03:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Awsome, someone understands for once. It is amazing how many people go to wikipedia for "factual" information and that's what I was concerned about. As for my sig I'm too lazy to sign in so copy paste and bang .— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.233.167.166 (talk)

You don't have to sign in to sign your comments, just hit the button to the right of that no-smoking sign with the W in it. Easier then copying and pasting in my opinion. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 05:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


Actually, he has publicly stated that he is an atheist. Check his site in the "ask Punk" section. He says something similar to "I don't believe in a big man in the sky that rules over everything." -Nairanvac

I checked the website and there is nothing like what you have stated. There is something where he expresses his disapproval of the "religious right" but there are even religious people who don't agree with the majority "religious right" I mean look at Jay Bakker.--66.233.167.166 07:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

"And you go home and pray to a God I know doesn't exist." - CM Punk, Ring of Honor - Night of Champions -March 22, 2003
"I can't even believe anybody would believe ANY of these myspace account are mine. Kids: someday?!?!? Religion: Christianity?!?!? What in the blue (faker!) hell!?" - CM Punk, cmpunk.com
"Fuck the religious moral majority, let whoever wants to marry whoever, get the fuck married. I love the moral high horse hypocrisy bullshit. I know super religious pricks do tons of steroids, but a homosexual life style to them is reprehensible. Fuck that." - CM Punk, cmpunk.com
"The atheist screaming "Oh My Fucking God"" - Dave Prazak, CM Punk vs Chris Hero - TLC Match\
And the previously mentioned "there is no God" comment in his open letter to Teddy Hart. He's an atheist. –– Lid(Talk) 10:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, there really isn't a cmpunk.com right now, so your quotes aren't credible unless you have some documentation or we can just make him a satanist or something, I mean this is wikipedia...

Well it is here http://www.cmpunk.com/. The myspace line is from a post of his on his forums here and the "religious moral majority" rant is from his "Ask Punk" section here. –– Lid(Talk) 05:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

So now explain how the last couple things prove anything because I have already went over this once and there was no definite answer.--207.190.61.122 08:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

A question...

Just a wild stab in the dark here, but shouldn't the uranage be put under the finishers section since CM uses it as a precursor to his Anaconda Vice? --  Jลмєs Mลxx™  Msg me  22:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

He hasn't used it to finish a match. Cheers, -- THL 02:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ohhhh, I getcha. --  Jลмєs Mลxx™  Msg me  02:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

But that's actually a good point. The Uranage is a direct setup to the Anaconda Vice. It should be alot higher on the list than the last signature move, probably at the very top of the signature moves list. 172.161.72.39 18:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

To quote myself from a slightly higher topic about his moves:

"Moves are in alphabetical order. Named signature moves are placed above unnamed signature moves. It's unnamed and starts with 'u.' That's why it's at the bottom of the list." He's also used the anaconda vice without setting it up with a uranage, so it's not necessarily used to set it up every time. Calaschysm 20:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

What is we put Anaconda Vice usually preceded by a uranage. TriMjr

ROH In ECW

in punks ECW debut the fans aknowlegd him from ROH.this should be noted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacob Richardson (talk • contribs)

Unless it is officially acknowledged by either WWE or ROH it counts as OR. -- THL 21:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

i meant the ECW fans chanted "ROH" and "Ring Of Honor" ad there were alot of fan signs for punk with the pepsi logo,i think this should be noted.it was in WWE ring.{{Jacob Richardson 02:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)|Jacob Richardson}}

No special mention is made on people's pages who migrated from (the original) ECW to WWE and ECW was chanted. Having ROH chanted for a wrestler in WWE is not really notable.
↪Lakes (Talk) 23:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Jacob, I knew exactly what you were saying. What I was saying is that unless WWE or ROH acknowledge that the fans were chanting ROH, then for us to say that they were chanting it in the article counts as OR. I also agree with what Lakes said above. Also, could you please sign your comments by typing ~~~~ please? Cheers, -- THL 01:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Personal Information is Libelous

My name is Chris Kowalski. Phil Brooks is my nephew. I would like to point out many inconsistencies in his biography. First of all...he has no sisters. Second of all, and most importantly, his father is not an alcoholic, never has been. Thirdly, his brother, never stole or embezzled monies from LWF. Points 2 and 3 are considered libelous. Cgkowalski 22:30, 28 December 2006

Response

1: To quote him during the Ring of Honor CM Punk/Samoa Joe Shoot Interview: "I got two little sisters in Chicago." He also references a little sister in his LiveJournal. See: http://cmpunk.livejournal.com/14709.html

2: He says in this interview (http://sports.ign.com/articles/748/748635p3.html), among others, that his father is an alcoholic.

3: He says in this interview (http://members5.boardhost.com/wrestlingnews/msg/62.html) that his brother "stole $7,000 from the LWF." Former tag team partner CM Venom also says that his brother embezzled money (http://web.archive.org/web/20040222144349/http://www.chicagowrestling.com/AL/al-cmvenom-12-17-01.htm).

This leads me to various conclusions:

1: He is using "sister" in a liberal sense, and it refers to relatives or other girls close to him. He says that his father is an alcoholic in various sources while working for various companies to stay in character in an otherwise out-of-character interview. He says that his brother stole money for no apparent reason.

2: He is a liar.

3: You are not his uncle and/or have no idea what goes on in your family, no offense intended.

Options one and two seem unlikely, given what I know about the guy. Maybe I'm missing something here, but unless you can provide information that says otherwise (which I would be very interested in), there is no reason to remove anything from this article. Calaschysm 04:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


Response

You obviously DON'T know him and have to read outdated internet sources. If you truly know him...call and ask him who I am. I know I just did and while you may not believe me, undoubtedly you will believe anything you read on the internet from the comfort of your mom's basement, no offense intended. I have contacted wikipedia with my personal information and have requested that this information be deleted. Phil has also contacted them. It's called "image" and sometimes image becomes very confused with truth. Watch what you print...it's libel and punishable by law. Cgkowalski 23:14, 28 December 2006

Response Outdated internet sources? His shoot interview is a video, as in he says it on camera that he has two sisters. His LiveJournal is his LiveJournal, no reason for that to be an "outdated internet source." The IGN interview is from this month, and the WWE magazine article is recent as well and not an internet source. Please provide better proof for your arguments. Adding comments like "comfort of your mom's basement" does not help your argument any. Calaschysm 05:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


Response

Blogging and internet articles are not promulgated materials. IGN and WWE articles are like reading comic books. Phil is a good actor and even a better liar. He was raised in Homer Glen, a rich suburb of Chicago, in a $300,000 house, as far from poor as anybody I know. He sets up a great image...but the downside is that his family's name is being dragged through the mud for no reason. Everything he says in those articles (and he has mentioned to me many times how he enjoys making stuff up as he goes along) just adds fuel to an image he has to maintain. I hold my family's name very dear. We are a tight knit family and have remained quiet over his musings in the wrestling community. But Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference and this has gone far enough. His grandparents (my parents) are concentration camp survivors and fought very hard to provide a life for his mother and I in this country. His father is a hard working man who provided everything for his son. His brother encouraged and supported him in his early years as a backyard wrestler. Joking around in the wrestling community is one thing, but printing those lies as truth on a world stage is another. I am asking you to please remove this information out of respect for my family.Cgkowalski 00:02, 29 December 2006

Response No offense, but people have been impersonated on this website before. What you say seems believable, likely even, but for all I know you're just someone who wants to mess around. Even if he does go around making stuff up for interviews, why would CM Venom bring up Mike Broox stealing from LWF? He says he doesn't like CM Punk and would have no reason to go along with a lie. My main problem is that there are multiple sources for everything he's saying, and nothing on your side. Everything you have a problem with is stuff that he has said, none of this is made up by someone here. If you want the stuff removed, feel free to remove it. Someone else can deal with whether it stays or not. Calaschysm 06:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment

Alright, alright, alright. Enough from both of you. If you are who you say you are, and Mr. Brooks has indeed contacted Wikipedia, then this whole thing will be taken care of by the end of the week by Wikipedia staff. Please don't remove the content yourself, as until your side has been proven it will be considered damaging the article by removing cited content. We have no way of knowing if you really are Mr. Brook's uncle, but Wikipedia staff does, so this whole thing will soon be sorted out. As far as us regular users are concerned, and that includes you Cgkowalski aside from any future contact you have with the Wikipedia staff, this thing is finished. It is now in the hands of the staff, so discussing these things here is pointless. Cheers, -- THL 06:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Please, everyone, have a look at WP:RS. If something is not citeable from a reliable source then it cannot be in the article. In-character interviews and such really don't count, because CM Punk is playing as his character (and lying about the backstory), rather than telling the truth about himself. --Cyde Weys 06:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

It has been noted many times that his real life personality and his CM Punk character are very similar. As such, we have no way of telling what is lie and what is true when it comes to his personal life. -- THL 07:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

If you can't tell what is truth and what is a lie then why do you publish anything under his personal life? Shouldn't that fall into a category of personal quotes rather than fact based biography?Encyclopedias are based on truth, not speculation. I used to use this source in my classroom but not anymore. If this is truth how many other articles on this site are written with such abandon? Cgkowalski 01:10, 29 December 2006

Wikipedia even says that it isn't an academic source. However, most articles about people that aren't alive are indeed totally reliable. Biographies of living persons are very touchy to write and keep. In my opinion, when the source must be reliable, go to the external links and references of the article to get the sources. Also, apply a level of common sense to what you are looking at. Take what you already know about something, and filter what you are reading through it. Remember, Wikipedia is a work in progress. A collection of all human knowledge is the goal, not the current reality. -- THL 08:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
The only source we have on the comments of Kowalski is himself, assuming what he is saying is true. That itself fails WP:RS as all we have here is claimed truths against the person themselves own words. The claims of libel in regards to BLP are libel against the person in the article, not the claims they make. –– Lid(Talk) 17:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Nobody that actually knows Punk ever calls him Phil. --David Bixenspan 01:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Excellent point David, I don't know who this Kowalski guy thinks he is but I dont believe u are CM Punks uncle for a few reason.
1. You called Punk by his first name Phil which almost all wrestling fans know that wrestlers go by their ring name outside the ring I've read on many sites that he goes by Punk not Phil.
2. If u keep saying that these sources are no good which they are, why dont u provide us with a source that says otherwise.
3. U are so full of it. I hate vanalists who have nothing better to do than ruin good pages. I feel sorry for all the guys who have argued with a pretender who is just full of bull.--24.184.169.37 02:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, we are required to assume good faith, or pretend to ;) -- The Hybrid 23:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


First of all...I'm not his uncle. I'm his aunt. We call him Phil because in our FAMILY we call people by their REAL names...not by what they do for a living. For instance...no one calls me TEACHER. Phillip Jack Brooks is his baptismal name. I am not a wrestling fan therefore have no need to call him PUNK. How stupid are you? Do you really think his parents and grandfather call him PUNK? We never have called him PUNK unless we were at a match in his early days. I'm not a pretender...I am who I say I am. If you would like proof I can post the pictures of him and Maria at my house for Christmas Eve dinner or the dozen or so photos I have of him at matches with his family. I'm not here to ruin a page. Just clarify information about his family. It's people like you, who fawn over celebrity and know nothing about a person's real life that discredit this content. Get a life and try to follow Wikipedia's guidelines of not being nasty. I've already contacted Wikipedia about this content and so has Phil (PUNK)...we are still waiting for a reply.Cgkowalski/Cgkowalski 16:31, 17 January 2007

OK Thats A Good Point. I Just Dont Like The Tone You Used Towards This User. You Are Of Course Phil's Family And You Obviusley Have The Right To Refer To Him By His Real Name. But In The Wrestling Industry Kayfabe Plays A Very Important Part. If I Was At A Show And Called Phil By His First Name He Would Either Egnore Me Or Be Very Offended. I Belive That The Comments Above To The Wikipedia User Were Unessecary , Reffreing To Someone "People Like You" And "Get A Life" Can Be Classed As Personal Attacks. Sorry Ms.Brooks But It Is My Duty As A Wikipedian To Point This Out, Thank You (Id Rather Be Hated For Who I Am, Than Loved For Who I Am Not 04:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC))

No, it wasn't your duty to point it out. If you look at this user's contributions, it is obvious they had no intentions of editing elsewhere, so future comments like this wouldn't be a problem. Sometimes it is just better to let dead dogs lie. It is random comments like this that made me play the role of peacemaker so I could declare this conversation closed again. Please, no one reply to this person's message. This conversation has been meaningless from the beginning, and it needs to die. This Cgkowalski will never convince us that she is Punk's aunt, so the only way is to use the appropriate channels, which she says that she has done. Seeing as the appropriate people have been contacted, there is nothing more that we can do here. So basically, no more discussing this. It is a waste of time. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 05:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it is immature for anyone who has never met him personally to feel that they know what he is called by his family. Also, I apologize for assuming that you were male. I know so many Christophers I forgot about Christine. Anyway, I would like to officially declare this discussion closed. If you and Mr. Brooks have indeed contacted Wikipedia, then this will be sorted out by them. Obviously I overestimated their speed, but they will sort this out. -- The Hybrid 22:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

ROH and OVW

Do these sections really matters? Other wrestlers pages only give a short reference to indy feds worked for. Plus, the week by week here is unnecessarily extensive. If it's all the same, I'd like to remove most of it and shorten it down to a paragraph or two. --Maestro25 07:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

That'd probably work. More extensive detail could be gone into on a Wikia, where detail is allowed. --Calaschysm 08:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, though, that his run in ROH was a really big part of both his career and the history of the company. His OVW run should maybe be cut down, but I think his ROH section should remain detailed. 70.130.144.187 00:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

His new finisher

He used KENTA's Go 2 Sleep on ECW to beat Johnny Nitro. Should that be mentioned? 24.34.81.232 18:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Not just yet, if he continues to use it as his finisher, yes. But not yet because he's only used it once so far, to say it has become his finisher without him using it more often would be speculation at this point. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why we can't mention it, since it's pretty outstanding. So long as we say he used it and not that its his finisher we should be fine for now. Also, is it just me or did you all mark out when he did it as well? 22:53, 21 February 2007 (GMT +0) Infernix.

It doesn't matter how outstanding the move is, he only used it once. Until he uses it more and absolutely establishes it as a finishing maneuver, we can't put it in. Putting it in as a finisher now would amount to speculation, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Bmg916 Speak to Me 01:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Its not a matter of whether or not the move was outstanding. Consider that Punk used it to finish his match in the WWE against Johnny nitro. This is significant because the WWE as a general rule of thumb doesn't use a move to finish a match unless it is actually a wrestler's finishing maneuver. There are exceptions to the rule, such as psychological warfare or a squash match, but this is hardly the case here. Punk is not trying to get into a feud with KENTA (sadly) and it certainly wasn't a squash. That Punk defeated a former IC champ in a match to determine the participant in a Wrestlemania match that determines a strong #1 contender is enough to validate his use of the go2sleep as a finisher.--58.108.121.185 10:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he used it as a finisher ONCE. As for whether or not he will use it again, even though there is a strong possibility he will in my opinion, until he actually does it is just an opinion and speculation and therefore does not go into the article. What do fortune tellers see in their crystal balls about the issue? Bmg916 Speak to Me 13:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

He used it again on the 2/27/2007 ECW episode.--Bedford 03:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, and once he starts using it more consistently (which I have no doubt he will) we can add it to the article. Bmg916 Speak to Me 03:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It should be referenced as Go 2 Sleep. Regardless of what Punk calls it, Go 2 Sleep is still the popular name, as well as the cited name under Professional Wrestling manouvers, for the move. If you want to be specific and call it as you see it rather than by popular name, then go and change the Vertebreaker references to 'reverse gory special piledriver' or 'back to back double underhook piledriver.' Its the same case scenario. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.69.219.22 (talk • contribs)

Please sign your comments with the four ~~~~, thanks!. Bmg916 Speak to Me 02:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

We call the move what the wrestler calls it. That's why on John Cena's page, we don't have the FU listed as a Fireman's Carry Slam (which is what it is). Call the move whatever Punk calls it. TJ Spyke 06:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

And since it hasn't been called anything, no name should be given yet. --Maestro25 07:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Both Styles and Tazz announced the move on ECW (April 3) as the GTS (Go To (2) Sleep). This includes Tazz's comment "Go To Sleep or GTS as he likes calls it." Creol 02:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Alright, sorry about the revert. I haven't seen it yet. Peace, -- The Hybrid

Money in the Bank qualifying match

Punk did not defeat Johnny Nitro to earn a spot in a specific match, he defeat Nitro to earn a spot in a specific match at a specific event. If you don’t like it, I suggest to go to Edge’s page a remove the part about him earning a spot in the Money in the Bank match at WrestleMania 23 (a future match). You might also want to go to The Undertaker’s page a remove the part where it says that by winning the Royal Rumble he earned a title shot at Wrestlemania 23 (also a future match).PepsiPlunge 03:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I have. I hope others can watch for it too because I don't want to have to watch every single one of their articles for the next month. TJ Spyke 06:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm also watching TJ, but hopefully we're not the only two, it's starting to become a real pain. Sometimes I've even given out vandal warnings to repeat offenders for blatantly ignoring the warnings. Bmg916 Speak to Me 19:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it's silly that losses to Striker and Holly, though maybe the Holly loss is important since it was a WWE/ECW first for Punk, stay, while the Money In The Bank qualification doesn't. A spot in WrestleMania is a big achievement and worth mention. I added it but then removed it seeing as it seems like it would've been removed anyway. I'm all for not adding week-by-week play-by-play, but that qualifying win has long-term implications. 24.222.102.68 19:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Announced matches that have not yet occurred cannot be added into this article per WP:PW policy, this is why it cannot be added yet. After WrestleMania, however, it's inclusion is warranted. Bmg916 Speak to Me 20:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

CM Punk or Phil Brooks?

did we agree to move the page or was it vandalism? The Royal Blue 00:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

To CM Punk? It was agreed upon. Peace, 声援 -- The Hybrid 01:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

ok, just i could of sworn this was Phil Brooks but if it was agreed upon then cool The Royal Blue 21:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, Wikipedia has a policy stating that the popular name for a person should be used, and that was the thinking behind moving this article. Cheers, 声援 -- The Hybrid 22:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


who is it that is removing thing and acting like he/she ownes wikipedia. wikipedia is a public web site which allows the public to state their apinions. I think the "MITB: qulification should be added to CM Punks profile because its a big part of Punks younge career, so I will try to bypass this lock that someone put on this page and add it

It's not a single user its an agreed upon system of the wrestling wikiproject that applies to all wrestling articles. –– Lid(Talk) 23:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


He's straight edge. Not a "follower of the straight edge lifestyle". Please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.72.84.29 (talk) 06:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Moveset

Okay two things here.

1. The Crooked Moonsault is listed as a "Split-legged Moonsault", and I haven't seen him do a split-legged moonsault ever. I've seen him do a regular top rope moonsault, but not a split-legged one. Could someone direct me to a match where he does a split-legged moonsault?

2. at the bottom of his move set it mentions the KENTA-esc combo that eh does before the Uranage, but doesn't mention that the Uranage is just the setup for the Anaconda Vice, and that the Uranage is (as far as I know) never been used without the the Anaconda Vice following it. so shouldn't the Anaconda Vice be mentioned? --Ben Tokyo 11:09 April 9, 2007 (UTC)

He did the split-legged moonsault in IWA-MS during Punk v Guerrero for the IWA-MS title, however I can not recall him performing one in ROH off the top of my head. As with the arm twist ropewalk legdrop this was much more common in his IWA days.
He has performed the anaconda vice without the KENTA combo outside of the WWE in OVW, IWA-MS and ROH. –– Lid(Talk) 15:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


He does (or at least attempts) the split-legged moonsault in Joe vs. Punk II and the Redemption 4-way, both times commentators say something to the effect of "Wow, it's been years since I've seen that out of Punk!" Nosleep1234 16:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Unscripted II

I think the reason given for his appearance at that event is incorrect. The snowstorm (obviously) didn't happen until that day, yet ROH had been hyping for a couple weeks before that show that "something big" was going to happen, and would offer the fans a refund if they wanted to leave after the third match. Obviously, this can't have been because Homicide, Jay Lethal, Alex Shelley, Chris Daniels, Samoa Joe, and AJ Styles (whichever of them were originally scheduled for the show) left early for the TNA PPV that was happening the next day.

The need for "something big" was because of the final walkout of Low Ki. A rematch, that never happened, of the first main event in ROH history (Low Ki/Daniels/Danielson) had just been announced for the 100th Show, and I believe other matches involving Ki had also been announced. The snowstorm and subsequent early departures for the TNA PPV just make that show look even more thrown-together when watching it now. Nosleep1234 16:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Real Name

Are you sure about his real name? I hear it was Philip Brookstein.

Unscripted II

This was the card before the "big surprise" changes

ROH World Title Match Bryan Danielson © vs. Alex Shelley with Prince Nana - Shelley pulled by TNA due to snowstorm

First Time Ever Dream Match Low Ki vs. Roderick Strong - Low Ki quit ROH, Strong was supposed to not goto show and ended up suspended/released from TNA as a result

Pure Title Match Nigel McGuinness © vs. Austin Aries - Only match that still occurred, Aries was told not to go by TNA leading to suspension

Special Attraction Jimmy Yang vs. Jerrelle Clark - Did not occur for some reason

Colt Cabana vs. Jay Lethal vs. Jimmy Rave vs. BJ Whitmer - Lethal pulled by TNA, other wrestlers moved around to fill up card

Also scheduled: Christopher Daniels; The Rottweilers of Homicide & Ricky Reyes with Julius Smokes; Adam Pearce - Daniels and Homicide pulled by TNA

The snowstorm can't be blamed for everything as Punk showing up was announced weeks before the show actually occurred. –– Lid(Talk) 05:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Is there a source to backup that his return was announced weeks before? I say this because why would he lie at the show and say he had asked for permission that day to go to the show after finding out all those people had to leave. Nenog 05:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately the way the ROH website works even the internet archive of the site makes it impossible to find ROH newswires from the period. –– Lid(Talk) 05:26, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Well I managed to find Gabe's post on Februry 3rd 2006 about Low Ki cancelling
"There has been a disgreement in business arrangements between Low Ki and ROH management. Low Ki has canceled all his ROH bookings as stated in a headline at Low-Ki.com.
will announce new matches for the ones that Ki has already been advertised in next week.
This will mark the end of Low Ki in ROH. We are sorry things turned out this way and apologize to the ROH fans for the lineup changes"
I'm still looking for the Punk surprise newswire. –– Lid(Talk) 06:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Bingo
February 6th: We are only going to have one item in today's ROHwrestling.com Newswire because it is so important. The item pertains to this Saturday's show in Long Island at Sports Plus Entertainment. You can now get tickets for 15-20% at ROHwrestling.com. Tickets are also available at Ticketmaster outlets.
As you know one of the main events was scheduled as Roderick Strong vs. Low Ki. Since Ki has canceled his ROH dates and parted ways with the company we know that we have to deliver something very special this Saturday. We know you were looking forward to this match. We were looking forward to this match just as much as you. We realize that if you have already bought tickets to this event that you have spent your hard earned money to see the best wrestling going today. We also know that many of you planned to buy tickets on the day of the show and you are giving ROH your faith that we will deliver on Saturday. Well, we have pulled some major strings and have something very special set for this Saturday in Long Island.
Over the past four years we feel that we've built up some good faith in our fanbase. We will put all that faith on the line and guarantee you that we have something unique that everyone will be talking about for this Saturday in Long Island. It will be a special night that no one in attendance will ever forget.
Is it a debut of a new star? Is it a returning wrestler? Is it a new kind of match? Is it a new or returning legend? Is it a new kind of format to a show? Will it be a very special dream match added the night of the show? Is it something you can't possibly imagine? We can't say, but all we can say is that everyone will be talking about this Sunday morning. We will tell you that you will regret it if you miss this show. This is so special that we are going to make you a once in a lifetime offer. You can come check out the first three matches on the main show. If you don't like what's going on, you can leave and get a full ticket refund. February 11th in Long Island is going to be a very special night in ROH history. Simply put, you need to be there.
So Punk's return was announced five days before it happened thus the snow storm was not entirely to blame. –– Lid(Talk) 06:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I know you're not going to like hearing it, but all that is is speculation. As they had to change the show around, there is no what to tell (short of ROH coming out and saying it) what they had (originally) planed the suprise to be. It could have been they had someone else lined up to face Strong, it could have been there was someone else they were planning to bring but were unable to, and yes it could have been they were planning to bring in Punk. Nenog 07:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC)


Early career

How come there is no mention of him fracturing his skull in a match against Reckless Youth? 138.163.0.42 01:45, 14 June 2007]]Yeah ur right.

Why don't you just add that in there then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.162.92.123 (talk • contribs)

Hardline?

i'm taking that out. he can't "act hardline" by being straightedge and a jerk. Hardline was a specific belief structure that encompassed many things beyond being militantly straightedge.

Recent History

Just wondering what happened to the fact that he won a fatal four-way match to win the number 1 contender spot on the June 26th episode of ECW on SciFi? That could have contributed to this so called "feud" with Nitro (Morrison). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starsfan32 (talk • contribs)

Pepsi Plunge

Should a note be added to it such as "Pre-WWE" or "Debut-2005?" Otherwise, a casual fan could read the article and expect to see the Plunge regularly. I've seen other articles list dates next to finishers that are no longer used. Gavyn Sykes 23:14, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Follower

"CM Punk is a follower of Straight Edge, a culture which he follows in real life". CM Punk is either Straight Edge or he isn't. Much like Joey Styles calling Kevin Thorn a "follower of the Vampire lifestyle, saying that he is a "a follower of Straight Edge" sounds alot like weasel wording and only cheapens his life decisions by calling him a "follower". Joey Styles sounds like he's parroting Vince McMahon who always seems critical of lifestyles he doesn't understand (like when he criticized Nick Bollea on "Hogan Knows Best" for having a frathawk) and wikipedia should not reflect Vince McMahon's limited understanding of or passive aggressive animosity towards anything "subculture" related.

  • How is that a weasel word? It's just a figure of speech. The only difference between being "a follower of straight edge" and simply "straight edge" is purely semantic. --MarcK 01:41, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
  • It's weasel wording to call anyone a "follower". One could call Joey Styles a color commentator. Which is conceivable as that's what he DOES and, therefore, what he IS. But when you start calling him a "follower of the color commentator lifestyle" you sound like a repressed suburban parent left handedly accusing him of following a trend or going through a phase. So, no, it's not semantics, it's weasel wording. It's not a figure of speach. It's a phrase designed specifically to demean someone. In this case, CM Punk and Kevin Thorn.
  • Color commentary is a profession, straight edge (or vampirism) is a life choice, there's a difference. Joey Styles is a color commentator so he gets paid, Punk is straight edge because it's what he believes. Regardless, this still isn't weasel wording; putting "some people say CM Punk is one of the best wrestlers ever" would be weasel wording. Saying "CM Punk is a follower of straight edge" is not. If you think it should be changed, then fix it, because I don't think it changes the article either way. And if you ask whoever put that phrase there I sincerely doubt they were trying to "demean" him. --MarcK 07:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
    • I missed this discussion and as the person who wrote the lead I should explain why I use the exposition in it. Part of WP:ARTICLE is to partially explain links rather than haphazardly linking to them and assuming the reader will click them. Simply saying "he is straight edge" makes an assumption the reader a. knows what straight edge is, b. knows how straight edge works and c. (which partially falls under a) knows its place in culture. By listing him as a follower of the straight edge culture I am not attempting to demean him, it's proper English given the circumstances and shortening it gives an unnecessary burden on the reader. On a related topic I should say it's amusing that I would've spent so much time on this article, writing and re-writing it, sourcing all of it, looking for free use images and trying to get this to featured article status just so I could include a tiny one word jab at him in the lead that need to be analysed to see. –– Lid(Talk) 14:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

15 Mins. Of Fame

Can someone please add that CM Punk won the 15 Minutes of Fame watch regaining a natch at SummerSlam for the ECW World Championship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BIGCANDICEFAN (talk • contribs)

We don't do week by week things, it MIGHT be note worthy if he wins at SS Swanton Bomber 00:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Intro

The intro is not supposed to be a whole biographt. shorten it. PayneXKiller 19:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Music on sky sports ad

Does anyone no what the music on the SKY Sports Vignette is? As we don't have as many ad breaks as americans there is usually a wrestler related short video instead. I'd love to know what its called a. because i like it but b. because i think it should be put in the article. Thanks User:George bennett90.205.60.50 15:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I like it isn't a reason to insert something into a article. Davnel03 19:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Importance

In WikiProjects Professional Wrestling, and Chicago, CM Punk is a high-importance article. CM Punk is [in wrestling] an indie-lengend, and one of the only main-event wrestlers to represent Chicago. Punk is also a 1-time and current ECW Champion and has held multiple championships in ROH. For these reasons, I have changed his importance to high, because low is unacceptable. Lex94 Talk Contributions Guest Book 11:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

"Professional wrestlers in Chicago" would make it high for Chicago however on the balance he isn't on the level of true "high" level peiople from Chicago such as Barack Obama etc. Even in wrestling being "high" are someone with probaby legendary careers that are below Top importance to the sport as a whole (for example Rikidozan and Hulk Hogan would be top while high would be people like Eddie Guerrero and Chris Benoit). Punk hasn't had the career length or achievements to justify a high ranking, however his ECW reign and ROH reign puts him above the average wrestler and thus a mid is applicable. –– Lid(Talk) 11:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I find that CM Punk is more important than that. Punk is like the new John Cena. Multiple wrestling companies fought to get him on their roster, because he connects naturally with the audience, and connects naturally with the mat. He seems like the MESSIAH of professional wrestling. Lex94 Talk Contributions Guest Book 23:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
"Like the new John Cena" is a personal opinion and considering Cena is a three-time WWE champion and one of the longest reigning champions ever among multiple other reasons it's only basing his importance based off his potential rather than just how important he actually is. There have been many next big things that have come and gone that are not of high importance (see: Lesnar, Brock). –– Lid(Talk) 23:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
That's true; point made. Just going to have to wait and see if Punk is actually the next big thing.Lex94 Talk Contributions Guest Book 00:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit request on 2 August 2012

The next week on Raw, Cm Punk claimed that he was not sorry for his actions, that The Rock had interrupted him & the show should end with him in the spotlight each night thus turning into a tweener. Later that night John Cena faced The Big Show to determine who would face Punk for his title at Summerslam. Punk attacked Cena & Big show thus resulting in a double disqualification & and he announced that there is no winner. But the new GM of Raw AJ Lee said Cm Punk ail face both Show & Cena at Summerslam. 69.70.160.2 (talk) 05:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Mdann52 (talk) 08:00, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
I'll close this request pending a source and specification. FloBo A boat that can float! 09:14, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Wrestlers trained

The source is false. Punk did not train Pelle Primeau, Mitch Franklin/Grizzly Redwood, Bobby Dempsey or Derick Dempsey. They all joined the ROH school after Austin Aries took over as trainer. 72.197.18.6 (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

tattoos

Punk has a skull of some sort or something on his chest. He also now has a skull tattoo with what appears as wings around it with a word an top. Im not sure exactly what it says but these 2 are missing from the tattoo section so if someone could add them. BlackDragon 00:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 October 2012

"please change "On October 31, CM Punk strong-armed his way into a match with Del Rio at Survivor Series," to "On November 20, CM Punk strong-armed his way into a match with Del Rio at Survivor Series," because that is the correct date of the Survivor Series 2011". Theno1katzman (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC) CM Punk legendary WWE title reign began at the Survivor Series in 2011. Here is an article describing the play by play of the match.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/949508-wwe-survivor-series-results-updates-analysis-and-review-of-every-match/entry/151614-wwe-survivor-series-cm-punk-defeats-alberto-del-rio-wins-wwe-title

On March 20, 2011 the date and location of Survivor Series 2011 was revealed.

http://www.wrestlingnewsarena.com/2011/03/survivor-series-2011-date-location-revealed/

quote for the source 151 footnote leads to http://www.wwe.com/shows/raw/2011-10-31/results and has nothing to do with the Survivor Series.

Theno1katzman (talk) 18:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC) {{cquote|It looks like Alberto Del Rio will be defending his WWE Title against CM Punk after all. After being knocked out cold by Big Show’s mighty fist, The Mexican Aristocrat awoke to find himself in the wrenching agony of The Straight Edge Superstar’s Anaconda Vise. With no choice but to agree to Punk’s demands for a WWE Title Match at Survivor Series or risk having his arm broken, Del Rio consented and the bout became official. Now that’s what you call hostile negotiations.

 Not done - On October 31 Punk forced a title match out of Del Rio to be held at Survivor Series. Both events are repped by their respective sources. Papacha (talk) 01:37, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Pescetarian

I can't see it in the article but he confirmed it here https://twitter.com/CMPunk/status/185198024455241728 MaybeMaybeMaybe (talk) 20:30, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Effectiveness of Moves

Under "In wrestling", we should put the effectiveness of moves based on where in a pinfall it would get them. For instance, very effective moves could be the roundhouse, Koji clutch, diving elbow drop, etc. It would also be useful to see how often he uses certain moves. Rope hung arm trap can openers are used almost never, while corner step up high knee followed by running bulldogs are seen almost always. It would be awesome to see this in other wrestler's pages, too. Please consider and respond. Thanks for reading.209.213.145.236 (talk) 21:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC) he has held the wwe champion for a year

That would just equate to opinion, though, so it's not really possible. أنا أحبك (talk) 17:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Heel turn?

For Punk's "WWE Champion (2011-present)" section, should it be re-edited to "WWE Champion and Heel Turn (2011-present)" with Punk being a villain presently? Jedi Striker (talk) 05:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

We do not use wrestling jargon such as heel or face turns in headings. Considering he was only heel two two years ago anyways. STATic message me! 05:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Also that section starts in mid-2011, so for a year of that Punk has been a face. Shall we have the header "WWE Champion and babyface and heel turn (2011-present)"? Probably best not. Tony2Times (talk) 13:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough. But I've seen wrestling jargon used in Chris Jericho's headings. Jedi Striker (talk) 18:08, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CM_Punk/Archive_1&oldid=1146386431"