Talk:Total Divas

Television: Reality Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Reality television task force.

United States: Television Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American television task force.

The article gives the impression that this reality show is actually a behind the scenes look at the personal lives of the female stars of WWE, on the level of a documentary. Isn't it common knowledge that it's still a fake entertainment show, even reported by Jim Ross that it's "mostly scripted"? I realize it isn't the same exact storylines as the weekly wrestling shows, but "Beyond the Mat"? (so Beyond the Mat is fake too?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.22.92.223 (talk) 15:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts exactly. If anything this show is "based on real events", but it's definitely mostly scripted. You can easily tell sometimes because sometimes they "ignore" the cameras making things happening unlogical (e.g. I remember Nikki & Brie buying a scooter off some guy on Craig's List, and talking about how they should take John Cena and/or Daniel Bryan with them because going alone would be "too dangerous" - all the while knowing a whole camera crew would be coming with them).

Maybe this is WWE trying to find out whether in an age everyone knows about kayfabe they can still sell something fake as real. There have been at least a couple of hints it's not real though, Wikipedia should at least question this - after all there's no proof it's real either.

(BTW don't get me wrong, I love this show even though it's scripted :) ) -- Sora 77.181.187.32 (talk) 10:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is everybody on the show referred to by their wrestling character name in this article when the show refers to almost all of them (save the Bellas) by their legitimate names? "Cameron" isn't really a character on Total Divas. Ariane Andrew is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.25.13 (talk) 12:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why the "Production" section is necessary at this point. It's pretty much a reiteration of what is already stated within the lead, plus the reference provided is a dead link. Although, the unreferenced information regarding E! and WWE announcing a "partnership" can be relocated and supported with a reference that I was able to locate. (1). – Recollected • 21:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No one has any comment on this? I'll just fix it myself then.... – Recollected • 00:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bill has appeared in, if I remember correctly, 2 episodes. Does this make him recurring or not? Depending on the answer, I will respond accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guidorulz (talk • contribs) 14:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not every person that makes a slight appearance should be listed. Only if they make an actual appearance in the show. When they do recaps of episodes and show matches, those shouldnt be listed. Like showing the matches with The Shield or so shouldnt be listed. 72.161.225.17 (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say that the synopsis for season 2, episode 7 is wrong. It's the synopsis for episode 5, just re-written. It should say "Summer Rae and Fandango go on a date. Jon is upset when Trinity makes a decision without him. Brie and Nikki clash over wedding plans." I can't edit this page to fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belllalugosi (talk • contribs) 14:33, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with SineBot, I can't edit the synopsis for Season 2, Episode 7 either, but it is not true. The S02E07 synopsis should be "Summer Rae asks Fandango on a date. Nikki and Brie clash over wedding plans. Jon is upset when Trinity makes a big decision without him." It's pretty much the same as SineBot's but OH WELL! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Officially Me (talk • contribs) 17:51, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add Season 3 because it was announced today on WWE.com, and Rosa Mendes will be joining the cast. Brandon Cena (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide

reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 20:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 June 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The final episode of Season 2, it just says "WrestleMania" but it should be "WrestleMania XXX" to be more specific. Brantastic24 (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide

reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NQ (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Fellow Wiki user Valleryking has stated the return of Summer Rae for the first half of season 4 yet there are no reliable and legit references to justify their statements. They claim to have seen her return on E! on the first look episode of season 4, but absolutely nothing has been posted online to back up this claim, hence all the reverts and edits being made constantly. In my view, this falls under the No Original Research rule (WP:NOR), so until Valleryking can provide legit references, their changes can't be kept. I have made it aware to Valleryking about needing to provide references to their changes but they claim their 'word' is good enough. If anyone could do anything about this situation, that would be helpful. Thanks, MSMRHurricane (talk) 07:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah she is returning for the first half of season 4.

Valleryking (talk) 08:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Valleryking, you are not providing any legit references. Stop making changes until you can. We've discussed this in full length. I was told to bring this problem here as nothing is getting resolved with just talking to you. MSMRHurricane (talk) 19:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MSMRHurricane we aleady made this summer total divas clear n n I'm privideing the refs. n sources n we talking to u to n u the one that started so stop making changes n I'm being nice so we lucky n we have both thinking about reporting each other like u said to da oda wiki fellow users so it won't take couple of days to think a out so do it n I will report u but like u it don't need days n u know that. I'm providing legit things. And stop lying n saying u looked every where to Summer return but u really didn't so STOL tryna be slick n childish on the INTERNET. We already had this n to pf . This is aggravating u keep coming with this every day since I joined Wikipedia. But u don't understand so just stop this already.I ask u for help today but u not worrying bout my help. I was tryna be nice n I'm still being nice n u taking my kindness for my weakness n that is not right to do that and that's so childish. And stop doubting me n we both tryna do the right thing for this site n everything. And this is the last time or not. Vallery king

Valleryking (talk) 00:52, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@

reliable source that really says that Summer Rae is coming back for season 4. It looks like that you were trying to do that in this edit, but the source you cited does not say that she is coming back to Season 4 of Total Divas -- it talks about her returning from an absence during season 3. At no point is season 4 mentioned. Even if that source said anything about season 4, that source needs to be cited every time information from it was added -- each time the idea of Summer Rae being on season 4 is mentioned on this page, as well as all the other pages you've been trying to add that claim. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Ian yeah I get what u are but what link u are talking What's up with Summer Rae on bustle n yes she is returning for the first half if season 4 n the pages I told I know but if she announced on June 30, 2015 n she was the first look for epi 1 s.4 n u don't believe me n u don't have so idk what else to say about the return of S.R. n did is aggracating. And yes I was bout add more for the return of Moinet. But she is n that's y I put she is a main cast member on the Summer Rae page and I change 2014 to 2014 - present n Main cast (season 2- 4 but yeah n I do need help wit did n everything else that's why I was changing it back to what I put n yea it is mentioned about Summer Returning to season 4. Valleryking — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 01:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No I benn not tryna add that claim becuz u mad that's u gonna see her return that's why u mad oh don't worry.

She is on total divas season 4 becuz what I saw on the first look episode 1 of season 4 she was back on Total Divas n it us true becuz what u are going to see with Summer Rae its gonna say WWW diva Summer Rae. She was taking pictures wit Emma and Nattie so she us back on season 4 part 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 01:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provide a source that shows her announcing it, or discusses her announcing it. It doesn't matter whether or not I believe you, "I saw it on TV" is considered original research, which

Wikipedia does not use

.

I'm not mad, I'm just getting annoyed with trying to make sense of your incoherent messages, your continued inability to cite a source that actually supports what you're claiming, and your apparent inability to comprehend what others explain for you. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:51, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ian.thomson

I understand u but u not understanding to what I'm saying and I know that for a fact n I'm not mad at u either n I'm do the best to my ability n its not doing n I wasn't coming g to u in mean way that's why I thought we was doing it together but every thing is is fine. But she is returning and idk what to say on this subject now do u understand me. And I'm bout to the change. But like I said its just idk wst to say on this anymore and I said my peace for this but yeah n this my peace.

(Valleryking) Valleryking (talk) 02:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you understood me, then you would have understood what I have repeatedly explained: it does not matter what an editor knows, only what the sources say. You would also understand I just warned you not to attempt the same change more than three times a day, which would mean you shouldn't do that.

I understand that you claim that you saw her on TV, I understand that you claim that she said she's coming back. I understand that you refuse to listen to any advice than you are given. If you had anything else you meant to say, maybe you should have tried proofreading your post before saving it. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stop tryna get smart wit me on the Internet, u never warned me I warned you , and u know that so why u keep on replying. You don't understand me because if you did u would say ok . This situation is childish and if u weren't so childish on the INTERNET u would be the bigger person like I'm bout to be. That's it for u. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 03:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I never warned you? Really? You sure about that?

I understand what you've posted, but you've posted no reason to agree with you. Once again, you need to provide a

reliable source that specifically explains that Summer Rae is coming back for season 4. If you understand that, why haven't you done it? Ian.thomson (talk) 03:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Honestly, I don't think Valleryking will understand. The best thing to do is report the user and try to get them blocked from editing on this page. I've been dealing with this person for the past few days and have been telling them several times they need legit proof for their changes, but they never provide anything. And judging from the way they have replied, this argument is going to go nowhere as they are not willing to cooperate and understand the rules for edits. @Ian.thomson, thank you for stepping in for me and reverting Valleryking's edits, as I am trying to cool down for a while as I have been involved in this edit war and do not want to be barred from being able to make edits, even if I'm doing the right thing, I think it doesn't matter. Anyway, I appreciate it. :) MSMRHurricane (talk) 03:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thank you Valleryking (talk) 03:52, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thank you do much MSMRHurricane for every thing. Valleryking (talk) 03:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For what? You still need to provide references other than "I saw it on TV". MSMRHurricane (talk) 03:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I been doing the reference and sources MSMRHurricane but Ian keep on reverting it and IDK why.

Thank you for joining this with me so appreciative for you.

Thanks again.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Valleryking Valleryking (talk) 03:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The edits you made did not include a source that supported the claims you made -- this lacked a source completely, this edit used a source that does not mention season 4, and this one completely lacked a source as well.

You can't just use any random source that is only tangentially related to the topic, it has to specifically support the information you add to the article. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not joining anything with you, Ian.thomson is absolutely right in everything they've been doing. Your source that you link on the article has NOTHING to do with the return of Summer Rae for season 4 of Total Divas. I've read it myself and they're right, it mentions absolutely nothing about Summer returning. Then when you get told that, all you can retort with is "I saw it on TV". Stop making changes without legit references, that's why all of your edits are being reverted every time. We both understand you, but you are not wanting to understand us, that is the reason why you're changes on both the Total Divas and Summer Rae articles are always reverted, even if its by the same people, because they are empty information that can't be kept as there is no proof to back it up. Understand that and none of this would have escalated to this point. MSMRHurricane (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Y'all not understanding me n y'all don't so I saw the report for me so I'm reporting to n pkz understand me n yes the article has to do wit Summer Rae so idk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valleryking (talk • contribs) 04:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who put Naomi as a guest for season 3 because she was a series regular or u could say a main cast member. But some sources and links do say that she was a recurring cast member for season 3 not a guest.

I didn't change for anything for Trinity or for her status season 3.

I didn't wanna change Trinity status so I was just consern that's all.

God blessed. Valleryking (talk) 14:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone tell me what the difference is between a guest and recurring? Specifically with JJ Garcia.

--Belllalugosi (talk) 17:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recurring constitutes 3 episodes in a single season, however, if the person has not made more than 3 episodes, the person is considered a guest. Now they can be recurring over all if they appear in one episode each season, although season pages will make them guests stars. - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 18:47, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@

DantODB:, @Zhyboo:, @MSMRHurricane: NCIS, Scorpion, or Grey's Anatomy do not split their seasons. Why would Total Divas be split? - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 20:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

@

DantODB:; Those notes are already on the episode page, above every seasons episode table the cast changes are stated. MSMRHurricane (talk) 01:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Nia Jax has been confirmed for Season 8. In an instagram photo she revealed she was filming for it. https://www.instagram.com/p/BiHh1GBA7WE/?taken-by=niajaxwwe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.149.21.193 (talk) 00:09, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this page list recurring cast members without sources? There's not a single citation confirming recurring status of any of the names listed. Also, why does this page differentiate cast members as appearing in a recurring vs. guest capacity without a single source? From my understanding, guest cast members on the show are all credited by their name and their relationship to one main cast member; I have never seen non-primary cast get a "recurring" billing on the show or anywhere by a reliable or unreliable source. All of that said, who creates the distinction between recurring and guest? Sounds like original research. Please enlighten me otherwise if need be. Thanks.

The article mentions a rumor stating the show has been canceled (without an actual reference). https://tonights.tv/shows/total-divas-season-10-release-date/ claims that the show isn't canceled, but hasn't been "officially renewed" yet either. GregWooledge (talk) 18:52, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]