Talk:List of WWE tournaments

The article is currently very long, long enough that it is exceeding one of the limits for templates, which is putting it in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. The cause is the various team bracket templates. It’s not that any of the templates are especially problematic, but each produces a lot of output the total of which is putting the page over the limit. The result is it stops processing before the end, and templates at the end of the article are not being expanded.

I suggest therefore splitting the article. This would fix the templates and make the article (or articles) more navigable. The obvious way is chronologically, by e.g. decade, resulting in four articles. Three or even two would fix the problem but would mean choosing more arbitrary cut-offs. Or perhaps there is some other criteria which could be used.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 13:07, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are all of these tournaments necessary? A lot of these articles already have dedicated articles for the tournament (For instance - The Cruiserweight Classic or WWF Brawl for All) Do we need to have this information duplicated like this? Could we not simply list it as a tournament, link to the article (As we do now), and write in prose about the tournament. Then, the list is merely for other tournaments that don't have a specific article, and would cut the size down significantly. And, above all, the article still lists all WWE Tournaments.

Incedently, should this not be List of WWE tournaments? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was typing up a response but then noticed your comment can like you idea better. We could like to the tournament that lives elsewhere and in prose write who won. - Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 13:20, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: I agree about List of, so I proposed moving them all below. Thanks! - Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 13:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We could split by decade, which would be the obvious choice as neutral, objective cutoff points. Or we could trim the article of non-notable one-offs. Do we really need to have a bracket for every four-man mini-tournament that was run over a couple of weeks of standard television episodes to set up a challenger for a title? It's something done so often as to be a routine way to fill TV time with no long-term impact and their inclusion is plainly bloating the page. This is a clear case where there's no reason to include everything that's ever happened on pro wrestling television. oknazevad (talk) 13:23, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if another page has the same tournament bracket (Cruiserweight Classic, WWE United Kingdom Championship Tournament, etc.), then we just put a header and a {{main}} to the host page, which will bring the included template number and overall page size down. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:08, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could the templates themselves be the problem?

WP:SIZERULE suggests to split when you exceed 50–60 Kb of readable prose, which isn't the case here. And besides, an article like Political positions of Hillary Clinton is the poster child for "very long". This isn't very long at all, unless we're taking the non-existent attention spans of millenials into consideration. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 22:30, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

The templates are the problem, see

WP:TLIMIT. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:00, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Yes. If you look at the page source each of the team bracket templates is generating a lot of HTML. It’s easier to see, without overloading your browser, if you look at an article it’s transcluding the table from such as The Wrestling Classic. This is probably unavoidable to generate the table layout needed for them, or at least doing it another way such as generating images would be a massive overhaul and have its own issues. Absent that the only solution is to reduce the number of such templates in the article.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 01:01, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In response to this conversation I have worked up a draft of how to fix this page without splitting. Here is how the page looked a couple days ago, just prior to the conversation starting [1]. Here is my proposed new version [2]. There were a few tournaments that the bracket really belonged elsewhere, so I moved it and used the {{

This looks much better. I support this version. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:06, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Completely pointless as above to duplicate tables simply to have them listed here. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:19, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, much better. It does a far better job of attaching relatively insignificant setup tournaments used as almost routine storylines to the events that have actually independent notability. oknazevad (talk) 13:46, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• How about the approach is modified, I have a couple of suggestions where we could do one or more of them to address the template issue and size ssue. 1) We could turn it into a table, that links to existing pages, instead of repeating it on this page. if the tournament doesn't exist it can always be listed below and we can do an internal line like so <nowiki>Tournament of Champions. That alone would bring the number of templates down. 2) It may also be worth considering moving any championship related tournament to the tournament article itself and link it - example CMLL World Heavyweight Championship#Tournaments - again bringing the number of templates on this page down. If people don't like that suggesting how about making sub pages for male singles, tag team and female tournaments? List of WWE tag team tournaments etc.?  MPJ-DK  10:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]