Talk:World Heavyweight Championship (professional wrestling)/Archive 1

World Titles of Other Weight Divisions

Like the NWA World Light Heavyweight Championship, which is a world title in its own right and importance, while other titles such as the ROH World Championship clearly do not make mention of being called a "World Heavyweight Championship". I think the article about defining World Championships should be rewritten, since not all World Championships are for simply for Heavyweights and exemplifies a bias in favor of the Heavyweight Division. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.61.200 (talk) 14:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

...but I believe the "Nomenclature" section makes note of that.^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 21:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

USWA Unified World Championship

The USWA Unified World Heavyweight Championship was the world title of USWA which was a major american wrestling promotion at the time, it was even unified with the AWA World Heavyweight Championship, so in short does it count as being a world title or not?

TNA Championship

Should the TNA Championship be a world championship. I mean they havent even defended the championship outside of the USA. They did defend the NWA World Championship outside of the US but there is some controversy reguarding the whole lineage of the championship. Personally I think the lineage should be from the first champion in TNA which is Ken Shamrock. And TNA refers to their past champions as TNA Champions. Anyways back to the topic, do you think the TNA Championship should be a World Title?

The idea here is to explain what PWI considers a World title. And they call TNA a World title.--DanteAgusta (talk) 02:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

ROH World Championship status

The ROH title does have World title status, I think. I don't think it should since they don't even have a TV deal. Also, the WWA Title had world title status, and the AWA title was revived in 1996 but didn't get world title status until 2005 when it started being promoted by ZERO-ONE. TJ Spyke 22:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

From the article, describing the ROH World Heavyweight Championship:

claimed world title status after belt was defended outside of the United States by champion Samoa Joe. However this is under dispute because the championship was defended in matches where there was no chance of it changing hands.

Could somebody explain this? Technically speaking, anytime a challenger is booked to lose a match, there is "no chance" of a title changing hands. Does it just mean that there was no reason for anybody to believe Samoa Joe would drop the title in any of those matches? Jeff Silvers 11:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It seems to be the words of someone who doesn't want to accept that PWI recognizes the ROH Title as a World Title. I assume your interpretation of the phrase is correct, but the requirement is that the belt be "defended" overseas, not that it has to change hands overseas... Joe could have won a squash match with the title on the line and it still would count. Clint 05:06, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't remember PWI ever saying that the ROH title gained World Title status, that just something ROH fans started saying. TJ Spyke 06:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I am confused the NWA Title is supposed to be a link from the Gotch 1908 belt and the Georg 1905 belt but is the 1905 and 1908 titles linked or what because i am confused. The second point is there is a forty year spell from 1908 to the formation of the NWA. Is there a page which shows the title history between these two points?

Consider who's graced PWI's cover 81 times. I doubt they have much interest in the indies, although I will admit that I've never actually read the magazine. Tromboneguy0186 06:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The ROH Title has every right to be called a World title. Who cares what PWI says.--DanteAgusta (talk) 22:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally I dont watch ROH, I've watched it before and wasnt impressed. So if ROH has defended their championship in more then one country the yes their title should be considerd a world championship.

Wrestlers who win heavyweight titles

If a wrestler wins a championship as a "Heavyweight" championship and not a "World" championship, but that championship eventually gains world championship status (i.e. jeff jarrett winning the NWA title in 2005 when it was not a 'recognized' world championship, does that make that credit that wrestler a World championship, even though it dident have world title status? and if someone has the answer to that question would it be possible to incorporate it into the article?

In my opinion no, reigns during the period where it didn't have world status shouldn't be considered World title reigns, but the whole thing is upto PWI on that matter, personally I feel the whole thing of PWI being an unbiased judge for World titles to be really out there considering they're so dedicated towards the mainstreams and writing in kayfabe. TonyFreakinAlmeida 04:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

It depends on the belt. PWI originally didn't consider wrestlers that won the WWF Championship between 1973 and 1983 (when it lost world title status) as champions, but last year decided to give them world title status. Wrestlers who won the ECW Championship before August 1999 are not considered world champs though. TJ Spyke 06:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

You know, I think it might be a good idea to start re-evaluating how we determine what qualifies as a world championship. As has been noted before, PWI, while being an independent third party, is hardly without bias. In addition, their decisions as to what qualifies as a world title seem to be largely arbitrary at times (deciding, for instance, that WWE Champions during the title's regional stint are world champions, but pre-recognition ECW Champions aren't). Jeff Silvers 04:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Professional Wrestling World Heavyweight Championships...

I have a question about some articles concering the status of several World Heavyweight Titles. In the article entitled "World Heavyweight Championship" it lists 8 Active World Titles and 3 Inactive Titles. They are as follows:

Active World Heavyweight Championships

   * AJPW Triple Crown Championship
   * AWA World Heavyweight Championship
   * ECW World Championship
   * IWGP World Heavyweight Championship
   * NWA World Heavyweight Championship
   * ROH World Championship
   * WWE Championship
   * World Heavyweight Championship

The Triple Crown and the IWGP are not called World Titles by their respected promotions.--DanteAgusta (talk) 22:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Defunct or discontinued World Heavyweight Titles

   * WCW World Heavyweight Championship
   * WCW International World Heavyweight Championship
   * WWA World Heavyweight Championship 

In the article entitled "List of professional wrestling World Title reigns by length" the list a little different. it contains

Active:

AJPW Triple Crown Championship IWGP World Heavyweight Championship NWA World Heavyweight Championship ROH World Championship WWE Championship World Heavyweight Championship ECW World Championship

Inactive:

AWA World Heavyweight Championship WCW World Heavyweight Championship WCW International World Heavyweight Championship

In the article entitled "PWI's List of Wrestling World Heavyweight Title Reigns" the list is even further contradictory towards the others. They are as follows:

Recognized World Titles

Active:

NWA World Heavyweight Championship WWE Championship World Heavyweight Championship

Inactive:

AWA World Heavyweight Championship ECW World Heavyweight Championship WCW World Heavyweight Championship

Now I do recognise and understand that there are going to be differing opinions about the status of some of these belts, and that would include other titles such as TNA Wrestling's new World Heavyweight Title just as an example. However i have noticed that each of theses articles cite Pro Wrestling Illustrated as their main or only source of information. I cannot imagine that PWI would have 3 different "official" opinions, I have even gone to their website to resolve my question and found no information there either. As a the kind of avid wrestling fan who researches statistics like this, I would appreciate it if someone could find an answer for me, as I do not have one and have no wish to further complicate these contradictions by editing the articles myself. This is especially true since I do not have an account at this time. Thank you.

Rick Smith 3:13 pm EST

A Question regarding the Titles

Can I ask where the information regarding the status of the world titles are, and who actually has the information to show that the ECW Title or the ROH Title don't have world title status? I have looked around and I can't find information saying that they don't.

Thanks Pastie252

The latest edition of Pro Wrestling Illustrated has a column on this. They don't give the ROH title "World" status because it is considered an Indy promotion. The reason why the ECW title wasn't given "World" status again was because ECW is not its own promotion anymore and is seen as a developmental territory more than a brand. The WWE title (Referred to by PWI as the RAW World Title) and the World Heavyweight title (Referred to by PWI as the SmackDown! World Title) are the only two titles in WWE given "World" status by PWI because they both essentially branched off from the Undisputed World Championship. Keep in mind though that PWI isn't really an "all powerful" entity that governs professional wrestling and championships, so even if they don't consider the ROH and ECW titles "World" Championships, the respective owners of those belts do, and that’s what really matters. -- bulletproof ^3:16 18:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for that, bus isn't it then disrespectful to the talent who hold the respectful 'world' titles for us (the de-facto IWC) to say that a wrestler such as Lashley hasn't held a world title just because the PWI claims the title isn't of "world" status? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pastie252 (talk • contribs)

True but you have to understand, PWI is just a magazine, no different than ESPN mag, or Sports Illustrated. In the end they really have no say over who is World Champ and who isn't.-- bulletproof ^3:16 15:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Can we make a page of ALL the important world titles, whether they are or are not recognized by PWI? Maybe we could have a vote to see what titles we should have together.--Tboneangle123 00:28, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean?-- bulletproof ^3:16 00:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Just like all the IMPORTANT MAIN titles in Promotions...like we need to vote to see if we should include it...like i would probably vote yes on the ROH title but no an some INDY promotions title.--Tboneangle123 00:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

PWI is a magazine and not an official governing body. To avoid original research, I think we should just list titles that are called world championships and make note that there is no official word because each company names its titles. That being said, if the issue of the ECW Championship comes up, we should not consider it a world title because it is no longer called a world title. But I would argue that under those guidelines, all champions up to and including CM Punk should be considered world champions because WWE called it the ECW World Title up until then. 70.109.106.170 21:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

As an afterthought, if there is an argument about what titles should be listed, (since a lot of promotions call their titles world titles) we list the most well known ones and make note that they aren't the only world titles. 70.109.106.170 21:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

ECW World Heavyweight Championship

Is the WWECW World Heavyweight Championship have world title statias? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.231.200 (talk) 06:56, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

First of all its not the "WWECW title". Quit being such a fanboy. Second, WWE considers it a world title. -- bulletproof ^3:16 08:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

WWE no longer considers it a world title. It was only refered to as the ECW World Championship when Rob Van Dam and Big Show held the title. Even then it did not have world title status, and today it is only refered to as the ECW Championship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.91.91.139 (talk) 01:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, WWE does consider it a World title, but not as important as WWE title or World Heavyweight championship. Michael Cole said "both Kane and Undertaker walked out of Wrestlemania World Champions." The PWI isn't very important when recognizing World Titles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckCoke (talk • contribs) 17:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Everyone in the industry considers it as a World Championship, even TNA. They alluded to Lashley as a two time world champion, they called Christian's ECW title win as a world title, and they called Matt Hardy's win as his first world title. Even PWI recognizes it now..

Someone explain this statement. "WWE considers it a World title, but not as important as the WWE title or WH championship." If it is looked at as a less important title, then how is it a world title? And if it is a world title, does that mean the other two are SUPER world titles? It just sounds like an antithesis, and that logic doesn't follow in WWE or on this site.(Seantherebel (talk) 05:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)seantherebelSeantherebel (talk) 05:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC))

Westling is fake. It doesn't matter how important WWE makes or thinks the titles are. They are props used to advertise there "money matches" more. World status does not even exist in wrestling or in any sport. As long as WWE says they feel it is a world title then it is a world title. It is as simple as that.--WillC 05:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The 3-hr Ventura Raw seems to have proved they don't consider the ECW strap a world title. The breakthru battle royal was for people who weren't world champions despite having what, 2 former ECW champs (Henry & Swagger)? --208.38.59.163 (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Sigh... How about watching the broadcast again? @ 7:20 - 7:40 Cole corrected Ventura. As only Raw and SmackDown participated, the participants must not have ever been the world champion of their current brands. The winner of the Battle Royal would then go on to face the world champion of their designated brand. While Chavo Guerrero, Mark Henry, and Jack Swagger have been world champions on the ECW brand, they have never been world champions on their current brand. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 23:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

"Brand world champion" is a hilarious oxymoron. If you're a world champ you're a world champ. "I'm the champion of the world....on this one TV show." I'm the legit world champion of Apartment Championship Wrestling so I guess we need to add this to the article too. --208.38.59.163 (talk) 17:26, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

You forget that World Wrestling Entertainment doesn't operate the way the World Wrestling Federation did. WWE in its current form is not just one wrestling promotion; it's three. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 18:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection

As a result of a recent dispute involving several 64.xxx's (perhaps from the same editor), I've locked this page for 5 days. To the anons please discuss the issue here (if those are actually real championships). Thanks.--JForget 00:05, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

ECW = Former world title?

I asked for citation on the ECW title being a former recognized world heavyweight title because my wrestling trainer (I'm training to be a wrestler) told me that PWI never recognized it, so I need credible citation to prove him wrong. Preferably, I'd like the edition of PWI that recognized it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.224.194 (talk) 01:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Your trainer is completely wrong. Just find a issue from that time period, easy to find on eBay.--DanteAgusta (talk) 01:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

World heavyweight wrestling championship → World Heavyweight Championship (professional wrestling)

Proper term.S_RX 00:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support. At the least move it so that the original title is capitalized. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:34, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
• Support. RandySavageFTW (talk) 09:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
• Support SAVIOR_SELF.777 03:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
• Support Genius101 ^Guestbook 15:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Resolved

S_RX 16:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

WHC, on SmackDown!?

What in the world is going to happen to the World Heavyweight Championship now that it's on the other brand? User: MK God - March 2, 2009. —Preceding undated comment added 16:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC).

Until after Wrestle Mania, there is no use to making changes to either World or WWE title. As we do not know where ether will end up with an up coming draft. Just sit an wait it out. --DanteAgusta (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)