The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:39, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With Authority! → WWF With Authority!WWF With Authority! – The game is officially titled "WWF With Authority!" per reliable sources and box art. The current title omits the WWF branding, which is part of the official title. Icaldonta (talk) 09:16, 21 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 11:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 11:24, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WWF With Authority! was, indeed, the name upon its retail release in 2001. However, when WWF changed to WWE in early 2002, the game's title and assets were also changed, to WWE With Authority! (explained in detail in the page's lede). At that point, the game was sold/distributed online only, and not as a physical retail package anymore, though. By time the game shutdown in 2003, it was using the "WWE" name.

I assume (but am not certain) that the article's title is With Authority! to account for both names "WWF" and "WWE".

So, do we go with the game's original title (WWF With Authority!), the game's final title (WWE With Authority!), or a compromise (With Authority!)?

If anyone knows of any similar examples to point to, that'd be great. Xanarki (talk) 18:15, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia’s guidelines on naming conventions for video games and other media, article titles typically reflect the original title under which the work was first released, especially if that release was in a notable and widely distributed form such as by a major publisher.

"WWF With Authority!" was the name of the game upon its official retail release in 2001, which remains the most publicly visible and widely distributed version. The subsequent rebranding to "WWE With Authority!" occurred only after the WWF-to-WWE organizational name change and was limited to online-only distribution, with no new physical retail release. This makes the original "WWF" title historically and contextually significant.

This approach aligns with precedent.

For example:

WWF SmackDown! 2 and Just Bring It are still titled as such for its original releases, even though later games in the series adopted the WWE branding.

The game Pro Evolution Soccer 2 was renamed World Soccer: Winning Eleven 6 International in North America, but the article retains the original title under which it first released.

Star Fox 64, despite later re-releases and remakes, retains its original name for its Wikipedia article.

In cases where the title changed due to licensing or branding, Wikipedia tends to preserve the original, widely released version as the title, with alternative names explained in the article body or lede — which is already being done here.

Therefore, titling the article "WWF With Authority!" honors the historical context, preserves alignment with naming convention precedent, and reflects the game’s most notable and accessible form. Icaldonta (talk) 11:31, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The most famous example is Star Wars (film), which was obviously later retitled alongside The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi as Episode 4, 5, and 6. — ImaginesTigers (talk) 13:16, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think this page can be moved to WWF With Authority! quite comfortably. Icaldonta (talk) 23:31, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. User:Xanarki explains it well above. WWF With Authority! and WWE With Authority! already redirect here, so it appears that the status quo is just fine. 162 etc. (talk) 18:27, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I respectfully disagree, the game was either "WWF With Authority!" or "WWE With Authority!" it was never just "With Authority!" Icaldonta (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  As someone who played the game while it was still online, the game was always referred to as With Authority!, or more commonly, WA!. The only time WWF/WWE was tacked on was on the packaging and certain graphics. You can browse through the website and (partially) the forums, and see that simply With Authority! was the common name, via archive.

  If the change from WWF to WWE never happened, then I'd agree with the retitle to WWF With Authority!. But due to the game having two slightly different formal names, I feel like With Authority! covers both adequately. Though other opinions would be helpful here. Xanarki (talk) 18:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Whilst the domain name you've shared was "withauthority.com" - the actual pages show it being either "WWF With Authority!" or "WWE With Authority!", also with logos - not just "With Authority". Web domains aren't always representative of the official name, and can be shortened for user convenience or marketing purposes etc.

  I still support WWF With Authority! based on it being the original title. Icaldonta (talk) 23:35, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Professional wrestling and WikiProject Video games have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 11:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. I'm not seeing anything here that overrules the previous close. CoconutOctopus talk 13:38, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With Authority! → WWF With Authority!WWF With Authority! – I previously requested this move before, however there was no consensus made to move, but have become more familiar with Wikipedia's policies, and I believe have been able to construct a more thorough argument.

First Release Name: Per Wikipedia’s Manual of Style for video games, articles should use the title under which the game was first released. The game launched in February 2001 as WWF With Authority! — this name appears on the retail packaging and in all initial promotional material.

Common Name in Reliable Sources: While the game’s official website often shortened the name to With Authority!, WP:COMMONNAME gives weight to secondary reliable sources, not primary or community shorthand. Coverage from major outlets such as GameSpot, IGN, and Metacritic, as well as official materials from THQ/JAKKS, consistently use the title WWF With Authority! when reviewing, listing, and promoting the game. This indicates that the WWF-branded title is the most common name in independent, verifiable sources.

Rebranding: The later change to WWE With Authority! in 2002 should be documented in the lead section, consistent with how other WWF-to-WWE games are handled. However, this does not override the first release title nor the weight of reliable source usage. Please also see WWF WrestleMania: Steel Cage Challenge, WWF SmackDown! 2: Know Your Role WWF SmackDown! Just Bring It and WWF Raw (2002 video game) that were also re-released as WWE games.

Conclusion:

Therefore, WWF With Authority! is the most policy-compliant article title, satisfying both MOS:VG (first release name) and WP:COMMONNAME (as demonstrated by usage in reliable secondary sources). Redirects can cover With Authority! and WWE With Authority! for search convenience. Icaldonta (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. See previous discussion above, which was only a couple of months ago. 162 etc. (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The above comment is not a debate and should be disregarded. Icaldonta (talk) 20:02, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Even though changing it to WWF With Authority! falls under the MOS of using the game's first initial retail name, the current title of With Authority! also falls under MOS:PRECISION as it adequately covers both titles (and, to a lesser degree as already mentioned, WP:COMMONNAME - I can find just as many sources that state the game as With Authority! instead of WWF With Authority! by the way). Overall, in my loose opinion, I just don't think the "using the initial retail name" argument carries the most weight, in this instance. Also, OP's weird fixation of bringing this issue up three times this year + deleting @162 etc.'s comment + asking users to "disregard" the reply, isn't helping matters whatsoever. Xanarki (talk) 04:06, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This is not accurate, I do not have a “fixation”, and these kind of remarks are not helpful. The initial AfD failed to reach a consensus back in July. I came back toward the end of August creating a Talk discussion with more information. When my reply did not get a response, I decided to take it to AfD again with more information.[[User:162 etc.]] replied to it saying to “look above”, failing to debate the new points I had established, which wasn’t helping matters whatsoever. I apologise in deleting the response, but in my mind at the time I felt the comment was not helping matters whatsoever.

  WP:COMMONNAME I think favours WWF With Authority! as this is used on third-party sites like GameSpot, IGN and Metacritic.

  I feel that WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:VG in themselves of WWF With Authority! meet MOS:PRECISION Icaldonta (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  > "The initial AfD (sic) failed to reach a consensus back in July."

  The initial RM saw no editors express support for the proposed move except for OP, and probably should have been closed "not moved." We're now four days into this one, and again not one editor has expressed support for the proposed move. 162 etc. (talk) 16:13, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  FALSE CLAIM. User:ImaginesTigers supported WWF With Authority! on the original proposed move in July.

  Your comment also does not debate the new information that I have provided, you are debating on what happened in July.

  I would like to hear your thoughts on the new points I have presented on this AfD, but am not interested in debating July any further. Icaldonta (talk) 17:57, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]