Talk:ECW World Championship

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ECW World Championship article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is part of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to Professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, you can visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Make two sperate pages? 2 PWI 3 WWE and ECW titles separate 4 Change of title 5 2 seperate championships 6 More WWE revisionism 7 Is the TRASH belt/Rhyno Storyline/Logo Color even notable to the history of the entire title? 8 Proper Name 9 First African American to hold title? 10 I think an official consensus should be made... 11 Requested move 11.1 Survey 11.2 Discussion 12 Proposed move reversal 13 Alternate version of the ECW belt 14 Newer new version of the belt

[edit] Make two sperate pages?

Who thinks the Original ECW World Heviweight and the new version the ECW World Title should be seperate?-- Kings bibby win 22:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PWI

Who gives a crap if PWI recognized it as a world title or not?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Unopeneddoor (talk • contribs).

Wikiproject Pro Wrestling does, I'm sure. And who are you again? ^---SilentRAGE! 13:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WWE and ECW titles separate

On the premiere edition of ECW on Sci Fi, Paul Heyman declared RVD the ECW Champion as he promised to. However, no mention was made of the WWE Championship being renamed the ECW Championship, and while RVD was presented with the ECW belt, he also kept the WWE belt. It appears as if the WWE title won't be renamed the ECW title, and instead, RVD is a dual champion. Therefore, I've removed the disambig about the ECW title now being the WWE title and recreated the "Current champion" section with information regarding RVD's being awarded the title. Jeff Silvers 02:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Change of title

I put the fact that in the ECW re-incarnation, the class-A title was know as the ECW Championship, deleting the World Heavyweight. So, I asked if the title of this article should be changed to ECW Championship. I put a link to WWE.com who confirms that. So, it should be done, or not?

• But they're still introducing him as the "ECW World Heavyweight Champion" (on ECW at least; he's simply called "the champion" when on RAW), and it's been called that ever since One Night Stand. I have yet to hear it called the "ECW Championship" except on that title history page, and that could very well be a simple mistake. MarcK 10:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, given that the original ECW and the WWE brand have different pages, why not for the title? Also, I beleive it was brought up that the "world heavyweight" has been dropped from the title to avoid any possible confusion with Smackdown's top belt...I'll try to find a source on that. Tromboneguy0186 07:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

They're still calling him the ECW World Heavyweight Champion. His profile page says that. The page you linked to (the history on WWE.com) says ECW Championship, but the page that links to that page describes the title as the ECW World Heavyweight Championship.

And about the new and old versions of the titles being separate... I don't know. Other than the fact that RVD hasn't been added to the title history at ECW.com (which could be blamed on mere page neglect, which WWE has been prone to in the past), there's absolutely nothing to indicate this is a new title. Jeff Silvers 06:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Tonight, ECW.com reads "Big Show pinned Rob Van Dam to become the new ECW World Heavyweight Champion." So, I guess that's that. Tromboneguy0186 03:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2 seperate championships

I believe this requires three completely seperate articles, as there are 3 completely seperate titles. These should be

• NWA World Heavyweight Championship
• ECW World Heavyweight Championship
• WWE ECW World Heavyweight Championship

The ECW World Heavyweight Championship is still owned by Rhino, who, as part of the legal settlement during the bankrupcy in 2001, was awarded the title of 'ECW World Heavyweight Champion' permanently, thus Rhino is still techinically ECW Champion

As the new brand of WWE called ECW has very little to do with the original ECW, and has a brand new championship, this should be given its own lineage and page on the site, with the 1st champion listed as Rob Van Dam, on 11th June 2006

User:ECWWrestling

I disagree strongly with this. For one, I've never heard anything that says that Rhino was declared the "permanent ECW Champion." Second, WWE owns ECW. Even if the current incarnation is nothing like the original, it is still "officially" ECW. There has been nothing to indicate that the ECW World Heavyweight Championship currently held by The Big Show isn't the same title held by Sandman and Tazz in the past. Yes, it's a different physical belt, and yes, Rhino owns the original, but that doesn't make him the champion. Hulk Hogan still owns the WCW title from the Russo incident at Bash at the Beach 2000, but nobody claims he is the WCW Champion. Furthermore, as the parent company of ECW, WWE has the right to decide whether or not the current title is a continuation of the original, and they have done just that.

As far as the NWA thing goes, I don't understand that one at all. The only connection the ECW Championship has to the NWA Championship is that they were briefly held by the same person. Jeff Silvers 20:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree with the guy above me.^ And for User:ECWWrestling, id like to say that just having 'the title BELT' doesnt make one a champion, you all should know that WWe's(affiliated) developmental promotion Ohio Valley Wrestling, its OVW Hardcore Championship was NOT represnted by a BELT at all, rather the championship title was a Trash Can!--T00C00L 12:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and I just realized this a couple a days ago that there is a difference in colouring of the ECW logo, on the original belt and the current belt, and so i put it up on the main page on 13th July 2006. --T00C00L 10:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank You--T00C00L 10:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

should't their be something about Rhino begin {being the REAL ECW champion

^what are you talking about, Fool? he isnt even in ECW !!! --T00C00L 07:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Why'd you sign your name to somebody else's message, T00C00L? (I removed it) Jeff Silvers 16:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

oh, thats because that FOOL, wrote begin where he was supposed to write being, :so he was not just making HIMSELF look like a fool, he was makin wikipedia and the whole professional wrestling industry, and professinal wrestling fans look like a fool,so,i corrected HIS spelling IN a BRACKET and signed my name beside That!!!--T00C00L 15:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

should't their be something about Rhino begin the REAL ECW champion

now how does that^ sound like, sounds as if he's trying to say that Rhino is going to be starting a New title which he (Rhino) will call the REAL ECW CHAMPIONSHIP or something like that, but thats NOT true is it !!! --T00C00L 15:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

You just can't take the truth that Rhino the real ECW champion user:supermike

just what we needed, another ^idiot!!! --T00C00L 07:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Rhino is not the real champion, he was the last champion of the old ECW. He stopped being champion when the original ECW folded in April 2001. Also, sign your posts people. TJ Spyke 00:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

TNA-loving losers should be banned from this site... Rhyno was the last ECW champ in the original ECW, ok??? Has he defended that title since then? NO... Because ECW went out of business... what gives Rhyno the right to claim to be the real champion anyway??? He's lost tons of matches since 2001 and is a WWE-reject... it's just like Gillberg sitting at home for two years and claiming to still be the WWF Light-Heavyweight Champion (because he still owned that belt.. h-yuck!)... Rhyno should get over the fact that in TNA he will never be as big as he was back in 2001... (TNA overall will never be big if they continue copying everything WWE did back in the 90s) Matt 4/9/06

When did Sabu win the NWA World Heavyweight Title? 9/6/06

well at least TNA is it using Eddie death as a storyline or bring back DX and NWO and Rhino is a NWA champion and is getting a way better push now then in 2001[supermike]

That might be because Guerrero never performed for TNA, and they don't own the copyrights for DX or the nWo. I'm sure if they could use DX or nWo, they would (they're arguably two of the three most important wrestling factions ever, the other being the Horsemen). Jeff Silvers 22:44, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More WWE revisionism

WWE has changed the ECW World Heavyweight Championship history on ECW.com so that any champions who held the title prior to Douglas' throwing down the NWA World belt are no longer recognized. This is in contrast to the previous version of the page, which acknowledged all champions starting with Snuka's first reign in 1992. Jeff Silvers 01:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The reason is probably because before that it was the NWA: ECW Championship, and the NWA is technically their competition. TJ Spyke 00:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

That hasn't stopped them from recognizing holders of the NWA United States Championship in their WWE United States Championship history. Jeff Silvers 08:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

they could also being only reconizing the championship of extreme championship wrestling and not eastern championship wrestling Ranul 04:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Ranul could be right, they didn't change their name to "Extreme Championship Wrestling" until the Shane Douglas incident. TJ Spyke 04:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is the TRASH belt/Rhyno Storyline/Logo Color even notable to the history of the entire title?

The TRASH belt is probably only and custom replica, The Rhino storyline is not really notable to the belt history since it just a storyline. This is just another critism at attacking the legitmice of WWE's ECW Brand. The promotion called ECW is dead,its assets where won by WWE.Its WWE choice if it wants to use for DVDs/Books or storylines. To get to my point, is the TRASH belt/Rhyno storyline be considered canon? Does it really mater what color the logo on the belt is. If not then it doesn't belong in a Genral Encylopedia,maybe an wrestling wiki but not on wikipedia. BionicWilliam 01:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

"Canon"? Is the purpose of Wikipedia to report "official" wrestling storylines? You can view the reference on the TRASH page if you want to learn how it ended up being the TRASH belt. Robert K S 02:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

But TRASH & the Rhyno Storyline have no connection to the actual history of the belt. The only connection ethier of them to the belt is that they claim to have the real belt and really anybody can claim a replica as the ture belt, if you read TRASH sorce article its says the have the real belt but the TRASH replacing ECW. That means that it a replica/remade not the real deal. Plus there not offical storylines since they have no connection the current belt just some old version/replica of the current belt/strap. WWE owns ECW assets so they can use it how ever they want ECW is there property not TRASH. Also do you really think that some joe shmoe off the street care what happened to the old phyisical belt of a dead promotion (ECW). To make my point clear is the TRASH belt/Rhyno Storyline/Logo Color even notable to the history of the entire title if it not it shouldn't be in this article in a GENERAL Encyclopedia.

BionicWilliam 03:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

The TRASH belt is the original ECW belt, and not a forgery, though I don't know of any way to evidence this besides the citation already given in the TRASH article, which you apparently did read but interpreted misleadingly. (If the TRASH belt ever said "TRASH" in place of "ECW" on the belt, it has not since 2005, when the picture of it was taken at TRASHionals 8 in Pittsburgh by OntarioQuizzer.) Whether the fate of the original belt is relevant to the article is for fans of ECW to decide, and I am not one. Robert K S 05:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proper Name

It seems to me that the name shortening to "ECW World Championship" is a permanent change, designed to avoid confusion with Smackdown's "World Heavyweight Championship". Subsequently, I believe that this page should be returned to that title, as it was for a short while.

This is not the same as the Rey Mysterio situation. In that case, the word "heavyweight" wasn't used on Smackdown's title because Rey is obviously not a heavyweight. Big Show, on the other hand, is very much a heavyweight. There would be no reason to drop the word based on that. The avoidence of confusion is a far more likely reason.

Which of course, leads to the question of "why not just call it the 'ECW Championship' instead?" If I may speculate, it would be to emphasize the idea that it is a world title, since it would otherwise not have it in its spelled out name (unlike the WWE Championship, where the first W means "World") oknazevad 05:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, the name of the article should be called ECW World Championship. They refer to it that way on WWE.com/ECW.com, so it should be referred to as ECW World Championship. I mean, WWE Monday Night RAW is referred to on WWE.com as Raw, and its the same way on Wikipedia, where RAW is Raw. So I agree with oknazevad when he says the page should be moved. TJ Sparks 03:07am, Nov. 23, 2006 (UTC)

It appears this page actually was moved to ECW World Championship at one point, but was then moved back here. Any particular reason? It's pretty obvious WWE has removed the Heavyweight portion of the name. Jeff Silvers 08:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Unless somebody objects, I'm going to move this to ECW World Championship pretty soon. In addition, we probably need to change instances of "ECW World Heavyweight Championship" to "ECW World Championship" when referring to the title after RVD's reign. Jeff Silvers 03:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I do object, and for the reasons i've stated before. We didn't move SD's title to "World Championship" just because they called it that while Mysterio was champion. TJ Spyke 03:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

That's because, as somebody else above said, there was a practical reason for removing the word "Heavyweight" from the title that only applied to Mysterio. Big Show is obviously a heavyweight, so there's no indication that the removal of the word from the title's name was specific to him. Jeff Silvers 05:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

We don't know if it was a permanent name change though. TJ Spyke 04:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, they've been excluding the "Heavyweight" from the name since about the time Big Show won it back in July, which was five months ago. They've also been referring to Lashley as the ECW World Champion (again, with "Heavyweight" excluded), so this doesn't seem to be exclusive to Big Show. Jeff Silvers 11:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Now, granted, tonight on ECW, Big Show referred to the championship as the ECW World Heavyweight Championship. But, for the title match, the graphic that comes up that states which title is being defended said ECW World Title. No heavyweight mentioned. And, last week on Smackdown, the graphic for the World Heavyweight Championship said World Heavyweight Championship. Not to mention, WWE.com calls Lashley the ECW World Champion. So, I think this hopefully clears it up on the official name, in which case I move we move this page to ECW World Championship. Anakinjmt 04:51, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. Since TJ Spyke seems to be the only person who objects, I'm moving this to ECW World Championship. Jeff Silvers 00:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Or maybe not. I forgot you can't move an article to a page for which there is already an article (in this case, ECW World Championship exists as a redirect to ECW World Heavyweight Championship, so I can't move it there). I have requested administrative assistance in moving this article. Jeff Silvers 00:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, lad. If that was made, why don't we do the same with the World Heavyweight Championship, the NWA World Heavyweight Championship, the IWGP World Heavyweight Championship, etc, etc, etc. I mean, this issue was about dropping the "Heavyweight" from the ECW world title. Look at the belt, it says "ECW World Heavyweight Championship". There is just two exceptions to that rule of the "World Heavyweight Championship" name: the WWE Championship and the ROH World Championship. But because it was said IN THE BELT!!!!!! I think that dropping the "Heavyweight" because it was said on TV (and Tazz refers time-to-time as the ECW Championship, dropping the "World Heavyweight") was totally senseless. I wasn't agree at all with that change.

[edit] First African American to hold title?

This page points out that Bobby Lashley is the First African American to hold the title, But since this title is concidered a continuation of the original ECW title line, Shouldn't Tazz be counted as one as well?

Is it considered a continuation of the original title? I haven't heard that, but that might be because I just didn't catch it. Also, please sign your comments. Anakinjmt 00:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Considering that List of ECW World Heavyweight Champions begins with Snuka and continues to Lashley, I'd say that Wikipedia's policy is that the current title and the title in the original promotion are one and the same. Removing the bit about Lashley's being the first African-American champ. Jeff Silvers 01:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

And just to clarify, I put this discussion into its own section called "First African American to hold title?" so it isn't confused with the above discussion about the title's official name. Jeff Silvers 01:30, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It appears that TJ Spyke re-added the bit about Lashley's being the first African-American to hold the title. I almost removed it, but then I realized that Tazz is Italian. Whooooops. A review of List of ECW World Heavyweight Champions reveals that no previous champion had been black. So... yeah. Lashley's the first. Jeff Silvers 02:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Tazz isn't black? Whoa. I figured he was Italian, but I thought he was black too. Wow. Learn something new every day... Anakinjmt 13:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe he is, but unless I missed it, his article says nothing about it. He's in the Italian-Americans category, but not African-Americans. Jeff Silvers 17:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I think an official consensus should be made...

I think an official consensus should be made concerning the name of this article on whether or not it should be called ECW World Heavyweight Championship or ECW World Championship. --James Maxx 17:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm setting up the standard talk header. Part Deux 19:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I think this has now been decided. Hopefully we now move on; Assuming my hopes are justified, well done team. Andrewa 08:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed move reversal

From my talk page:

Part of the reason there was no opposition was that it was never mentioned at WP:PW, is there a version of the deletion review for moved pages? The article should be moved back and the members of WP:PW should be told about the move request. TJ Spyke 07:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Disagree that the article should be moved back. A Wikiproject is just another collaboration tool. If other editors decide not to consult the Wikiproject and the Wikiproject members don't notice what is happening, the processes just go ahead without them. In hindsight I should have raised it at the Wikiproject myself, but that's done now.

Yes, there's a review mechanism, which is simply to list a reversal of the move on WP:RM.

My suggestion is that you discuss it on the talk page first. Quick relistings often attract a certain amount of opposition unless there's a consensus of several editors established on the talk page first.

You might also consider making better use of the watchlist facility to prevent this sort of thing happening again. Andrewa 22:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the move should not be reversed, as, regardless of what the belt says (the WWE Undisputed Championship never had the words "Undisputed" on it, but was referred as undisputed), it should stay as ECW World Championship. We should go by how WWE refers to it. I mean, if the page RAW is changed to Raw, based on how it is on WWE.com, this article should follow suit and be referred to what it is currently known as and NOT ECW World Heavyweight Championship. --  Jลмєs Mลxx™  Msg me  My contribs  13:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Personally I doubt that any such move request would gather much support. But I was asked what the process is, and that's what the process is. It's probably not perfect, but it seems to do the job. Andrewa 09:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it should stay as ECW World Championship, that's how the WWE refers to it, and I like it better because there really isn't a weight limit as to who can hold it, as with every other world heavyweight title in pro wrestling, and ROH also calls their title simply World Championship because there's no defined weight limit. TonyFreakinAlmeida 01:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the move should be reversed. It was just because of a reference on TV that motivated the move. Just look at the belt: it reads "ECW WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT WRESTLING CHAMPIONSHIP" and it hasn't been removed the heavyweight label in the new version of the belt. Also, in TNA sometimes they refer to the NWA World Heavyweight Championship as "NWA World Champion-title" or "NWA Heavyweight Champion-title", but that was a reason to move the article? Not for me. Xbox6 02:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The WWE owns the belt, title, rights to it's history, they can call it what they want regardless of what is on the physical belt itself, so if they officially call it ECW World Title or Championship or if they renamed it to Tuesday Night Crapfest World Title, regardless of what is on that belt, that is it's name. TonyFreakinAlmeida 02:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what is going on here, but the belt clearly says Heavy Weight to me. It is a Heavy Weight belt under heavyweight rules. They have just titled it to avoid mixing it up with the WWE Heavyweight belt. Govvy 13:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

But as James Maxx mentioned above, the words on a title's belt don't necessarily form the actual name of the championship. If that were the case, we'd have to move this to "ECW World Heavyweight Wrestling Championship." And to address Xbox6's comments, this wasn't an isolated reference on television, it's the name which is used in the overwhelming number of instances on WWE television and in other WWE media. Jeff Silvers 03:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, what about that: leave the title of the article as ECW World Championship, but the beginning of the article was Extreme Championship Wrestling (ECW) World Heavyweight Championship, and a reference to the name change by WWE. I think that'll be a good agreement. Xbox6 19:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggest it saying something like "The ECW World Championship (formerly known as the ECW World Heavyweight Championship" blah blah blah. Anakinjmt 04:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't know, but in this page the title is still refered as World Heavyweight [1] Xbox6 15:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

And yet, here[2] it's called the ECW Championship, and here[3] if you look on the side bar, it says ECW World Title. WWE.com often doesn't agree with itself in certain things. Based, however, on not only what's said and shown on TV, but that two cases of ECW World Championship on WWE.com are used and only one case of ECW World Heavyweight Championship is used on WWE.com, and in the shop area no less, which I doubt gets updated very often on content changing a little bit, I'd say it's fairly safe to keep this page where it is. Anakinjmt 17:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alternate version of the ECW belt

i have always noted that this article has never mentioned and has never had a picture of one of the designs of the ECW world title, here are some pictures of that particular belt, [4] and [5] and [6], and i really hope that this is mentioned and a picture of the belt is posted on the main page of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.4.69.4 (talk) 14:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

We would probably need to find a better image of the belt, preferably one where the belt is by itself (and, of course, the image would have to be fair use). Jeff Silvers 12:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Or free use. Anakinjmt 18:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Whichever. Jeff Silvers 01:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Newer new version of the belt

Has anybody noticed that WWE seems to be using yet another ECW World Championship belt? I'm not just referring to the red ECW logo; this newer belt seems to feature quite a bit of black in the background (but is otherwise identical to the previous one). I believe they started using it sometime after Lashley's reign began. Jeff Silvers 22:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Its actually the same belt. If you look at an old picture of the original ECW title, you can see that it also had that black background look to it. Its just lighting that gives it that look. The reason that direct images of the belt make it look gold all over is because the light of the flash is heading straight towards the belt. It all has to do with lighting-- bulletproof ^3:16 00:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind... -- bulletproof ^3:16 23:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)