Talk:World heavyweight championship (professional wrestling)

Redefine this article?
Does the page article necessarily have to be about the 'heavyweight' championship? The heavyweight is just a division - a weight class, and there are, as far as I know, actual World Titles and top promotion championships at that, that are NOT for the Heavyweight Division (okay fine, just CMLL), but the way this article depicts it is as if the World Heavyweight Title is the only top price and only World Title. So what I'm proposing is that this article should be about the World Championship in professional wrestling and not just about the Heavyweight division, or maybe at least recognize these titles (NWA World Junior Heavyweight Championship, CMLL World Light Heavyweight Championship} as World titles in their own right and its holders as Former World Champions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.68.59.72 (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * the problem with that is that despite the name, there are no weight divisions in wrestling, at least not in most notable companies that promote a world title. Its even noted in the lead of the article that a world heavyweight title is generally the top title promoted by a promotion that is contested between top contenders, not necessarily over 225 lbs contenders. Note Rey Mysterio.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 04:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. But how about atleast, recognizing the CMLL World Light Heavyweight Title as a World Championship and it's holders as Former/Reigning World Champions as there company has? As you said, this has nothing to do with weight class anymore, this is about what the promotion considers it's Top World Championship.

rey and dave
rey mysterio and dave batista were brothers but dave hurt rey and at smackdown rey told dave that thier were bros and that day rey will get to stop dave —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.137.43 (talk) 10:44, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Multiple World Heavyweight Champions
why was this deleted? ditto for the list of tag-team champions.--74.178.227.26 (talk) 01:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Lack of sufficient reliable sources seems to be the cause.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 04:45, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense. In the individual articles for the various titles there are lists showing how many times a wrestler has held a particular championship. In order for those lists to be created a source needed to be used. Therefore those sources would then be usable for the List of Multiple World Heavyweight Champions. After all, if you can prove that Triple H holds the record of most WWE Heavyweight Championships at 8 and The Rock and John Cena are tied at 7 apiece, then you know that they are multiple World Champions. Wraith Wolf (talk) 15:17, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

ECW and ROH
Since this article clearly includes any Title that was called a "World Title" by its promotion, then why are the ECW and ROH Titles listed as "prominent"? According to who? Does anyone honestly believe that the ROH Title is as prominent as the WWE Title? They should both be moved to "other notable titles" section. Spoke shook (talk) 09:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Third top promotion in the world, prominent yes. Comparing titles is opinion.-- Will C  10:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I take it you will soon provide a reliable source that they are the "third top promotion in the world"? Spoke shook (talk) 11:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's one that says third-biggest and here are some that say third-largest in the United States   which certainly argues prominence. Now if the top promotions in say Japan were to call their titles World titles they would more than gladly be added as well.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 15:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, one of those, looks like a blog. Secondly, since when are any of those sites "reliable sources"? Next, even if they WERE reliable sources, so what? They say (along with all the spelling and grammatical errors) that ROH is the "third largest" wrestling promotion in the USA. And? What is the cutoff? What if someone found a reliable source stating that another promotion was the "fourth largest"? Or the "fifth largest"? Is there a cutoff? And if so, how is that determined? By you? I stand by my earlier assertion that ROH(and earlier ECW) never had the kind of mainstream exposure and recognition of WWF/WWE, AWA, NWA, WCW. Even TNA is pretty doubtful. Spoke shook (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL Can you provide a reliable source for what you suggested in your example? There's always usually a cutoff and it's not decided by me. Have fun source hunting! -- Unquestionable Truth -- 20:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, I didn't SUGGEST anything. I merely asked how supposedly being the "third largest" promotion automatically warranted it being "prominent". Your response was to go "LOL", and totally avoid the questions that I posed. However, simply typing "third largest wrestling" into a search engine returned these among the top 10 (as well as 4 for ECW and 3 for ROH)....

  

So we have MCW as number three during the 90's(when ECW was around), NECW(which it around now), and UWF(the third largest wrestling company ever built). But none of this is relevant. People could provide sources saying that this or that company is the "largest" or "tenth largest" or whatever. The point was how does that make it "prominent"? Has it been decided that the "top three" should be included? Or should there be other criteria? Like having had mainstream exposure and recognition? All your ROH sources cited the Wrestler movie, yet that movie also featured CZW. Is that therefore also a "prominent" promotion? Hopefully your response this time will be more than "LOL". Spoke shook (talk) 06:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Or the GWF

Or WWA

But really that's not the point. The point is regardless of whether it's number 2 or number 20, does it have enough mainstream publicity and mainstream writing about it? Spoke shook (talk) 08:33, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Since no one has replied, and since, someone above pointed out that being prominent is opinion, it seems proper to remove the controversial ones from the prominent list, but keep them in the article itself obviously. Spoke shook (talk) 05:51, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Controversial? Um the only thing you've done is remove titles which you contest to be world titles based on your own personal opinion as a fan against reliable sources. Wikipedia does not work that way. Until you can convince a majority that the titles in question are not world titles, the current consensus stands. -- Unquestionable Truth -- 22:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

ROH is not recognized as a prominent promotion, this comes from PWI the leading authority in Pro-Wrestling, the only titles currently recognized are the NWA, WWE, World HeavyWeight, and TNA Title. This article must be edited to refelect the truth, despite what many ROH fanboys may want its simply not currently recognized, despite their many talented athletes and growing fan base they are still little more than a top-indy promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.128.161 (talk) 17:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * PWI is no authority in prowfessional wrestling. This has been discussed numerous times.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 22:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Table
this section is missing huge chunks of data, as well as unnecessary data the "other" section seems completely useless we should only take into account the major promotions -- AWA, ECW, NWA, ROH, TNA, WCW, and WWE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.101.160.159 (talk) 19:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

It is. But based on reading the attempts at defense above I don't think the article author is willing to go outside a narrow viewpoint, which if he asked the majority of the "smart" wrestling fanbase to use a cliche term would disagree with. There are wrestling historians and journalists whose word on this issue I would take before the author's unless he reveals himself to be some name with some credibility in the wrestling business that has the weight to determine these things. To say Adam Pearce is more a world champion than Hiroshi Tanahashi just ignores reality because the person has to enjoy some recognition of being a world champion (the belt is ultimately a prop meant to draw money) and wrestling fans don't recognize Pearce as such. Even if he wants to continue using his narrow definition, the NWA World Championship should be dropped from world championship consideration when Shane Douglas threw it to the ground initializing the ECW promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.110.115.214 (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Table 2.0
Please leave in the listings for the IWGP and all the other World titles from Mexico and Japan.

Wrestling in those countries is as big (if not bigger) than it is in the U.S., and thus the titles from the major companies in those countries are considred as world titles as well.

This article isn't just for titles in U.S. based companies.

Vjmlhds 18:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. There seems no need to have a table for American titles and a list for non-Americans below it, when the table and list list the same thing. "Active" and "extant" are synonyms, and the external link here lists them together. Seems like some patriotic original research to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Holy shit, that was fixed quick. While I was typing, even. Thanks, VJ. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:34, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

What makes a "World" Heavyweight Championship?
I have found nothing that specifically says that NJPW or AJPW don't consider their top titles as "World" titles. I think that some people are getting too caught up in the fact the word "world" is not in the official name of the title.

NJPW and AJPW are both major promotions in Japan, that may hold more prestige there than WWE or TNA do here in the U.S., thus their top championships are viewed perhaps more highly there than the WWE or World Heavyweight Titles.

In fact I have found nothing that specifically says that the top Japanese or Mexican promotions view their top championships as anything less than "World Championship" level titles.

On the contrary, they all promote their top championships as "the most prestigious title in wrestling", or something to that effect.

While I realize that anybody can claim their title as a "World Title", I would hope common sense could prevail and people would differentiate between a claim by a fly-by-night regional/independent promoter, and one from an promotion which has been around for decades and has established history in their respecive countries.

Vjmlhds 17:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It's strange. Wrestling is different. We haven't a comite who says what is a world championship or the championships under this definition. The promotion calls a championship "world heavyweight championship" and it is a world championship. Of course, the promotion must be prestigious. But, any case, it's the most prestigeus championship in a promotion, whatever his name is (WWC Universal championship, WWE Championship, Megacampeonato AAA...) I think that we must to add CZW and PWG as notable indy world championships. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't start adding indy titles into the mix, because now you're opening up a can of worms. And no, ROH isn't an indy anymore...they're owned by a billion dollar media conglomerate (Sinclair Broadcasting Group), and have a nationally syndicated weekly TV show. Vjmlhds 21:30, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's the thing. We haven't an official definition because we haven't an official comitee who says what is a world championship. The definition "the most prestigious championship of a company" don't say anything about the kind of promotion. I only add PWG and CZW (maybe CHIKARA) because are the most notable indy promotion (i don't know if CZW has a TV show) and the championships are called "world championships". We are not talking about MWF, NWE or PWS, we are talking about the most notable indy promotions today.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The fact that all the companies you mention are independents - by definition of what an independent promotion is - means that their titles shouldn't be considered World titles. They are smaller, minor leauge, developmental promotions for the major companies.  Indies are what guys go to while waiting for their next big national gig.  PWG, CZW, and Chikara might be the top indies...but they're still indies.  We need to establish parameters via consensus on what makes a major promotion...things like having a major finiancial backer or a national TV contract, or seeing what kind of arenas events take place in, as well as things like a promotion's history.  Vjmlhds 01:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Archive_65#Proposal_for_new_World_Heavyweight_Championship_classification


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Professional_wrestling/Archive_85#World_Heavyweight_Championship_.28professional_wrestling.29


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=world+titles&prefix=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject+Professional+wrestling%2FArchive&fulltext=Search+archives&fulltext=Search

The discussions above dated a few years back basically resolved the issue in accordance with WP:V and WP:NPOV. The result of the discussion established that the community itself could not declare what should and should not constitute a "world championship" based on personal opinion and the scripted trivial nature of professional wrestling per WP:NPOV. Additionally it was decided that if such article listing all notable world heavyweight championships and world tag team titles where to exist, it would have to conform with WP:V and WP:RS, whereby only championships that have ever been referred to by their owning promotions as world titles would be listed. If it did not conform with these basic principles, the article could easily be nominated for deletion based on its trivial content alone. Just shedding some light on the matter. 108.13.255.83 (talk) 09:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * None of those discussions really made any headway on what could and couldn't be considered a World title. And on top of that, the Japanese promotions have never promoted their top titles as anything less than "World title" caliber...no major promotion has ever billed their top titles as anything less.  That would basically be admitting that "our main title isn't as prestigious as another company's top belt", and no major promotion worth their salt would ever do that.  There is nothing anywhere saying that the Japanese companies don't consider their titles as "World title" level.  By the very nature of wrestling, all promotions declare their top belt as the biggest and greatest thing since sliced bread.  What we need to do is set a standard for what should be classified as a major promotion.  Once we do that, it would be easier to classify what makes a "legitimate" World championship.  I mean I can take an old belt from my closet and slap some tin foil on it and call my self a World Champion...it doesn't make it so.  But as I said before, no major promotion has ever come out and said that their top title isn't a World title...it's always assumed that it is whether the word "World" is there or not (ex. IWGP stands for International Wrestling Grand Prix, GHC stands for Global Honored Crown).  Vjmlhds 14:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * There is no such thing as a legitimate world title in an illegitimate sport. Terms like prestigious and world title level/caliber get thrown around here all the time. This is an encyclopedia not an in-universe wrestling encyclopedia. See WP:BURDEN as to your claim that these Japanese wrestling promotions promoted their titles using the term "world" in their name. The point of those discussions WAS to demonstrate that no headway on what could and couldn't be considered a World title could in fact be made. Your claim that no major promotion has ever billed their top titles as anything less is itself an unverifiable claim. Per WP:V and WP:NPOV I'm going to have to revert the page again to the previous listed format that includes other world titles and will also have to remove the Japanese titles due to WP:CITE seeing as how there are no references from their owning promotion noting their titles using the term world championship. If you wish for a more centralized discussion I invite you to take it to WP:PW. -- Unquestionable Truth -- 22:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Tables
I've began merging the list of titles into the tables above. The previous format seemed to be distinguishing between the most "prestigious" titles and the others, which is of course subjective. McPhail (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2013 (UTC)