Talk:WWE Championship/Archive 2

message: Who the heck is this guy? I never heard of him. Also, "The History of the WWE Championship DVD" and the timeline (which came withing the DVD) doesnt mention him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JesseOjala (talk • contribs) 08:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, this page gets vandalised quite a bit (although not enough to become protected). -- Scorpion 13:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's protected now, thank goodness. So much vandalism today. Anakinjmt 02:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: Is Shawn Michaels really the lightest champion? I watched the History of the WWE Championship DVD and it mentioned that Eddie Guerrero was the lightest WWE Champion of the history. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JesseOjala (talk • contribs) 10:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked the weights, and Eddie Guerrero was billed at 228, wherease Shawn Michaels is billed at 227, making him the lightest champion, albeit by a pound. Where exactly on the DVD was this mentioned? I'll go back and look through my own copy, but where did they say Eddie was the lightest? Anakinjmt 18:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

text: After the Angle vs Benoit match. It also mentions that Eddie was the smallest champion. --JesseOjala 10:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Did it refer to him as the smallest or lightest? Because Eddie was the physically shortest WWE Champion. His billed height was 5'9", which did seem to be accurate when comparing him to someone of roughly the same height, such as Chris Benoit. Probably, the best source for determining whether Eddie was the lightest champion would be to listen to the weight announcement of his WWE Championship match with Brock Lesnar during WWE No Way Out 2004. Odin's Beard 00:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also remember Eddie being mentioned as lightest on the DVD. As for 227 Vs. 228, is 227 HBKs weight at the time he won the WWE championships, or is it his weight today? -- Scorpion 02:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would assume his weight when he won the title, but I'm not sure. If it is, any idea if we're going by first time he won the title, or any times? Or, would you be thought of as the lightest champion even if you're a former champion? Anyone know exactly? This may result in changing it to Eddie, good catch Jesse. Anakinjmt 06:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: HBK had a billed weight of 227 from 1994, way before he won the belt in '96. He has kept that same billed weight since, even though he has visibly gained and lost weight.Halbared 09:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay then. I'll take a look at the Eddie/Angle match from WM XX and see what weight he was billed then. Anakinjmt 01:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EG is the lightest 

message: Anyone know when the logo on the Big Eagle belt was changed from 20px to the Attitude one? --Aaru Bui DII 12:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Eagle belt logo 

message: I would like to present the question of who has the roecord for shortest title reign? On this site it goes to Andre the Giant but i would say it was Yokozuna who at Wrestlemania IX (9) won the title From Bret "The Hitman" Hart also lost it just 21 seconds later to Hulk Hogan! any other Opionions would be great —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.142.151.124 (talk) 23:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yokozuna was champion for about 2 minutes, not 21 seconds. After Yokozuna won, Mr. Fuji got in the ring and challenged Hulk Hogan. Hogan came out, Bret Hart gave Hogan the approval to go in the ring, and then Hogan had the quick match. Andre is considered to have officially forfeited the title as soon as he gave the belt to DiBiase, which was about 45 seconds after "pinning" Hogan. TJ Spyke 01:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The record for shortest title reign 

message: Please note, that in accordance with our fair use guidelines, one of the requirements for use of a fair-use image is that it must be irreplaceable by a free image. The image of the belt  in this article is clearly replaceable, and has already been replaced, by a free image. Anyone edit-warring to put a fair-use image back in when a free one is available is subject to being blocked from editing. (To be clear, it doesn't matter if the fair-use image is of higher quality.) Also, since this article is about the championship, I'll be cleaning up the fair-use galleries. They're effectively decorative (another thing the fair-use guideline prohibits), it's not needed to show every belt design in order to discuss the championship. Discussing that the belt design has changed over time should be sufficient. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree with using free pics when possible, the gallery for previous belts designs should be used and I support putting it back in. TJ Spyke 01:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please state why it passes the fair use guidelines, with a special eye toward number 1 (are the belts still in existence and accessible to the public? If so, a free image could be created and the images are replaceable), 3 (how is the use of so many fair-use images minimal, especially when we already have one free image of a championship belt to use?), and 8 (how is the use essential rather than decorative? How would it significantly enhance the reader's understanding of what the WWE Championship is, rather than just making the page look pretty?). I'd certainly listen to your argument, but this is a Foundation issue. If the use fails the guidelines, it may not happen, regardless of how many people may support it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's essential because it illustrates the previous WWE belt designs which helps show the long history of the WWE championship. -- Scorpion0422 23:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That really doesn't answer the question of why this couldn't be accomplished with prose-"The belt has existed continuously since 19XX. Its design has been changed X times, and has been awarded to X number of people." And that's not even very good prose, you could certainly do a whole lot better than that. Just like we don't need a massive gallery of every design change of the Ford Mustang to illustrate the point that it's been around a while and has changed designs a lot, we don't need pictures of every instance of the belt to illustrate that point for it. We can simply say so, and source it. Now if this were free-use imagery, that would be simply an editorial decision, and I probably wouldn't honestly care that much. But it's fair-use images, and it's decorative and excessive. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use warning

message: :Image:WWE_Championship_animated.gif
People seem to think this photo is uneeded. I want to know everybody's opinion before I give up and ask for the images deletion.--  Hornetman16  21:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You say that the point of the image is to show that it's a spinner belt, but I think that can easily be mentioned in the article without the use of a copyrighted image. -- Scorpion0422 21:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And your point is?--  Hornetman16  21:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My point is that the image brings nothing to the article and we are supposed to trie to cut down on non-free images and use them only were necessary. -- Scorpion0422 21:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When you were a kid what did you look at the most in an article? The pictures right? So why take it off so other kids can't look at it?--  Hornetman16  21:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You have a LOT to learn about Wikipedia. Read WP:NONFREE. -- Scorpion0422 21:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinions needed

message: Shouldn't there be an article mentioning that when John Cena was in Smackdown, the plate on the left of the spinner said "Smackdown", but when he was drafted to Raw, it changed to "Mon Nite 
Raw" User:inglewoodplz 13:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Raw/Smackdown

message: Isnt the WWE Championship the highest ranked title in WWE since at WWE PPV's, the WWE Championship is always defended in the main event of every PPV?Nosaints4life 21:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Overall, it probably is the more prestigious of the two singles World Titles that the company uses. However, I don't think I'd put anything in the article concerning it. It's just an edit war waiting to happen. Both the Raw and Smackdown brand commentators have stated that their brand is the top brand and all that. While the WWE Championship certainly has a prestigious lineage and history on its side, I don't think I've ever heard or read anything that "officially" declares the WWE Championship as "THE" top championship since the creation of the World Heavyweight Championship.Odin's Beard 22:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah probably but if you notice that when the World Title (SD!) is defended at a PPV it is either under the WWE title or the ECW title match and the ECW title didnt get much recognition by WWE only until the Lashley-Mcmahon fued. Look now, the CM punk-Nitro fued is that much of a  big of deal, and during the promo packages of PPV's the WWE title match is always the last one (thus the main event)Nosaints4life 00:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WWE Championship, the highest ranked chapionship in WWE

message: Isn't the purpose of the pic to see the entire thing it's describing? I believe it does, which this 'free' is not.--Hornetman16 17:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately free images (regardless of quality) are preferred over fair use images. Buy a replica and take a picture yourself for a better quality free image.-- bulletproof 3:16 17:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

text: As it is you have 4 reverts so I would leave the current image (Revert 1 , Revert 2 , Revert 3 , Revert 4 ). Free is better than fair, and fair is better than copyright. Darrenhusted 17:18, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take it easy Darrenhusted. Everyone just stop reverting. I am trying to clarify this copyright thing. Aaron, the look is copyrighted but that’s only if, for instance, another company made a belt of their own and it looked exactly the same as the WWE Championship. In this case it would be the same as taking a photograph of a building such as Ford Field. Sure the architectural look is copyrighted, but that does not mean it is restricted for a person to take a photograph of it and replicate the image on paper. If the photographer chooses to release their image into the public domain then it becomes a free image. So if you take a picture of the WWE Championship and release the image into the public domain then it becomes a free image as well. The rule about photographs of copyrighted things still being copyrighted regardless of who took the photo would only apply to logos. Hope that cleared up a few things.-- bulletproof 3:16 17:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

text: We now have a better pic.--Hornetman16 (talk) 01:17, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The pic 

message: :Image:300px-WWEchampbelt.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 01:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:300px-WWEchampbelt.jpg

message: While the official name was "WWF World Heavyweight Wrestling Championship" (inscribed so on the belt), it was always referred to as the World Wrestling Federation Championship on all shows. Title matches involving Hulk Hogan Ric Flair, Randy Savage, Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels were always announced as for the WWF Championship. K a r n a 23:33, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not WWF "World Heavyweight Championship" 

message: WWE.com has confirmed that Cena will surrender the title, but they have not officially vacated the title yet, and I am not sure when this will happen.  Until it happens, leave Cena as current champion with an added note that Cena will surrender the title due to pectoral injury. TonyFreakinAlmeida 20:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Really, the statement altogether shouldn't really be included in this article. Since Cena hasn't given up the title yet, telling when it's supposed to happen violates the WP:Crystal policy. Wikipedia's not meant to be a crystal ball. The information about Cena's injury really belongs in his article rather than this one.Odin's Beard 22:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Odin, it's not really a crystal ball kind of thing, the article on WWE.com states it right there that the title will be vacated, if it's documented on the official web site, sourced here, then what's the problem? Anyways, what's done is done.  TonyFreakinAlmeida 00:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The title isn't vacant yet. 

message: Mr. McMahon just vacated the title on ECW. Now what? — Chad "1m" Mosher  Email Talk  Cont. 02:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The title ''IS'' vacant.

message: That the title has only been Vacent twics one in 1999 and then now supermike  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supermike (talk • contribs) 23:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been vacant more times than that... TonyFreakinAlmeida 23:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This current vacancy of the championship is unique as it occurred due to a legitimate injury rather than a planned storyline. Prior to this, there were five other occassions in which the title was vacated. However, only four of those other vacancies are officially recognized. The one that isn't involves Bob Backlund "losing" the title to Antonio Inoki on November 30, 1979. They had a rematch December 6th in which Inoki was pinned but the WWF President Hisashi Shinma declared the match a no contest due to outside interference. Due to Shinma's decision, Inoki refused the title and it was declared vacant. So, the WWE just decided to go on as if the title change and the vacancy that followed never happened. Taking note of the title's vacancies could be a useful contribution to the article I suppose.Odin's Beard 22:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The title's vacancies are already noted in the list of champions page.  The original post here suggested this was only the second time the title has been vacant, which is totally false.  Austin losing the title in the Triple Threat to Kane and Taker, Andre trying to sell the title to DiBiase and the title being vacated, Hogan being stripped, Michaels surrendering the title due to knee injury, etc.  Even if this is supposedly the first "legit" injury vacation, kayfabe is followed, and this'd be the second time injury forced vacation, proof or not. TonyFreakinAlmeida 16:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: should it be meantion

message: Randy orton was awarded the title at no mercy and lost it to hhh the very same night and I can't post this information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.185.223.166 (talk) 00:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Vacant anymore 

message: Will the old belt be restored now Cena is out? CandiceWalsh 13:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the belt awarded to Orton (then won by Triple H, then won by Orton) last night was a new belt that looked exactly like Cena's but doesn't spin (or perhaps just Cena's belt with the spinning mechanism removed).  I've seen this mentioned on a "rumors" Web site, but can we find a legitimate source for this?  It seems like something we should note in the custom belts section. Jeff Silvers 14:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, to me, this is no longer a custom belt, it's one that was first custom, then was made the standard.  Removal of the spinner gimmick pretty much solidifies that it's not Cena's and  it's just THE belt of the title. TonyFreakinAlmeida 21:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belt? 

message: In the "Current champion" section should we add title defenses in current reign (unless it ends up being too long, like Cena's would have been)? For instance, mention that Orton has defended/retained against Shawn Michaels and Chris Jericho. This would require changing the other championship pages to make it consistent. Any feedback is welcome. Gamer313 (talk) 15:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You would have to include live event defenses, especially considering title changes do occasionally occur there. It's not worth it. Mshake3 (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I was just thinking of PPV, TV show defenses. But you're right - it should be all or nothing. I don't have the time to find out the card for all live events too. Thanks for the response. Gamer313 (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Title defenses of current champion

message: On his profile it say he the first WWE champion but where is his name on the list Supermike(talk) 12:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's on the list. In the List of WWE Champions article, his name is first and foremost.Odin's Beard (talk) 22:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Check the article. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 01:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Buddy Rogers

message: I just wanted to note that the WWE title has a semi-new design. The entire belt is the same, except for the actual WWE logo in the center does not spin anymore. Not that big of a fact, but I just think it should be noted.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.212.128 (talk) 18:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I too noticed this, it can't be added without a source. Gavyn Sykes 18:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I just wanted to add the Cena used the same "fixed" spinner belt design from January 2007 to May 2007. Oh yeah, Vince Mcmahon didnt say it was the new WWE Championship, he said,"The new WWE Champion, Randy Orton." (John_See-nah 06:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People have to realize the difference in terms of championship belt, or title belt, and title itself.  A new WWE title would mean that they'd created a new title entirely. TonyFreakinAlmeida 16:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why not have the article state something like "With Randy Ortons Win the belt was altered so that it was a non-spining design. It is beleived to be the same belt as worn by Cena." Just an idea.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.98.109 (talk) 18:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Because that's unsourced speculation. See WP:V and WP:RS Gavyn Sykes 18:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the logo doesn't spin, why was it shown to be crooked rather in its straight "fixed" position? If you watch Orton walking down to the ring for the match on last Monday's Raw, you can clearly see that the logo is crooked.Odin's Beard 13:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I have the replica belt and you have to stick something inbetween the spinner part and the main plate and sometimes if you shake it too hard or drop it you can dislodge it. I think backstage Orton or someone else hit the belt by accident and broke the thing that held the spinner inplace and didnt have time to fix it because it they were live, I bet you that the next time you see the title on TV it will be in it's fixed position again. (John_See-nah 06:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two things. 1. Lakers, if you have a replica belt why haven't you bothered to take a picture of it so that we could at least have a better quality image than the one currently in the article?  2. The whole thing about someone accidentally hitting the belt is OR. I also have noticed that the belt presented to Orton had the spinner removed and replaced with a fixed WWE logo, so I'm guessing the consensus is obviously agreeing that the belt no longer spins. That’s set. However, we cannot speculate on anything so the only thing that can be added is that the belt presented to Randy Orton no longer appears to spin. -- bulletproof 3:16 07:07, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I've uploaded my picture, you guys are free to edit the picture if you want because I took a really bad picture (John_See-nah 18:04, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It’s not bad but could you try another one? Do you have a white blanket or sheet that you can but the belt on to give it a white background. It would be a lot easier to edit like that. Also unstrap the belt so that we can see all 5 plates like in :Image:WWF big eagle belt.jpg. Would really appreciate it. Thanks.-- bulletproof 3:16 20:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah I saw that too, but when they handed the title back to Randy Orton the belt was back in the fixed position (John_See-nah (talk) 03:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha! Orton must have dropped it backstage or something. Clumsy Orton-- bulletproof 3:16 03:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am rather sure that the belt had been given a sort of regulator during John Cena's last WWE Championship reign. If you had the volume up high enough, when he spun it, it seemed to make a 'clacking' sound (kinda like the casino game, with the big wheel and the arrow thing that makes a similar sound when the pegs hit it. Sorry for not knowing the name of such game) So, the reason the logo never seems to spin now, is since nobody purposely spins it anymore, and the spinning logo is usually set to the upright position. The regulator then should keep it in that position Kogoro_9_23 (talk) 12:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: No More Spinner

message: Someone put that the Hardcore Championship was a replica Big Eagle Belt from the Attitude Era. This is not correct. It was the previous design. I deleted that blurb from the article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.153.61 (talk) 20:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hardcore Championship

message: Why was the grid that contained all the previous belt designs and years held deleted? I thought that looked much better, and was more exhaustive, than the current thumbnail pics of only two previous designs. Tony2Times 17:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The images were deleted because they were copyrighted. The images currently used in the article are free images, pictures of replicas taken by other editors here. If either of you have a replica belt we would appreciate you taking a picture of it to add it to the article.-- bulletproof 3:16 17:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I could try and help get the images for the Smoking Skull Belt, and the Undisputed Championship Belt. However, all I have are plastic versions. I would like some thoughts from a few people on this before taking pictures of them for the article though. Kogoro 9 23 (talk) 09:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, no probs with me for that as long as we got something to show the world right? ;) The Game - Hhh210 (talk) 12:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Previous Designs

message: I'm sure there has to be someone out there who owns a replica belt of better quality than the incredibly cheap-looking one that's up there now. 141.213.180.13 (talk) 20:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't seem to be the case since the image used for this article has been in use for months and months. And, given the fact that a high quality replica of the title from wwe.com costs in the neighborhood of 350-370 bucks, it's likely to stay up for a while. Lotta money to pay for one ugly-@$$ belt.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Odin's Beard (talk • contribs) 23:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if you would notice, that's the plastic version (which is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more cheaper). The 300+ bucks you're talkin' about is the gold-plated replica. Just like to clear that out mate :p The Game - Hhh210 (talk) 12:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is the Legit belt, that is not the plastic version, I know cause its mine (John_See-Nah (talk) 02:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belt Image 

message: I accidently messed up the history. does anyone remeber it. If so, change it back to the way it was before i messed up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klrobinson93 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accident 

message: randy orton is the current wwe champion.
. (Sawyer (talk) 03:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  randy orton 

message: The current champion is unknown SO DONT CHANGE IT  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joesta03 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: YES SIR!-- bulletproof 3:16 03:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He's right, we have no clue who the champion is right now. We should remove it until it's confirmed.68.150.39.45 (talk) 04:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In a situation like that, just stick with the current champion because there was no title change. Until it is shown on TV or acknowledged by the company it is assumed that he is still champion. But since we all know that Regal stopped the match anyway, it's a moot point.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SChaos1701 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unknown 

message: Every champion should have a Custom edit of their WWE Championship  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.59.116.115 (talk) 11:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Custom