Talk:Extreme Championship Wrestling/Archive 1

message: Extreme Championship Wrestling → ECW - ECW is currently a redirect page for ECW (disambiguation). ECW is known more with the wrestling organization than the English Civil War or Ensoniq AudioPCI. A top level link would direct individuals searching for those topics Kyros 00:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~'
*Support: ECW is synonymous with wrestling, change page. DemonWeb 00:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Not moved as no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested Move

message: There's been some editing issues regarding the inclusion of profanity in the Crowd chants part of the article. I don't like those words, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Profanity states that profanity is perfectly acceptable in the context of a relevant quote, which is exactly what we have in this section. For the sake of accuracy and staying true to the subject matter, I believe we should probably leave them in. --Jtalledo (talk) 06:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Profanity

message: On the 23rd May 2005 RAW, McMahon claimed that he funded ECW in order to steal.. uuh I mean grow new WWE talent. Correct? Or work?
--Vodex 09:01, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
It was just a work. WWE never funded ECW - the only thing they did do was allow ECW to take a loan out in 2001, just before the company died.
Yazman 14:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not so Yazman.  You are confusing this with the fact that on the May 23rd, 2005 Raw Vince cut a promo in the ring with Eric Bischoff and Paul Heyman and said there was a line item on the ECW bankruptcy totalling some $900,000 given to ECW by WWE.  Just because ECW was in debt to WWE at bankruptcy doesn't mean Vince wasn't bankrolling the organization for years; which on Rise and Fall is admitted to by both Paul and Vince.  In fact McMahon claims it was only right to compensate ECW for using their talent; which he claims WCW never did. BronzeWarrior 08:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  McMahon funding ECW? 

message: I realize that right now this is part of the section for Eastern Championship Wrestling, but I think this de-emphasizes just how important breaking with the NWA was and how disrespectful it was seen to be at the time (something Forever Hardcore covered better than The Rise and Fall of ECW) but how necessary it was.  I would suggest that instead of having a seperate chapter for Eastern Championship Wrestling the "history" be merged together.  In particular this would also benefit the history section itself which I think unfairly starts with "The Crucifixion."  It seems like the history needs to be fleshed out in general. BronzeWarrior 08:41, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  History: The Night the Line Was Crossed 

message: I think this entire page needs some serious rewriting, too much is just stolen from http://www.wrestleview.com/info/faq/ecw.shtml and contains large amounts of POV language. R-T-C 09:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Some Serious Re-writes Needed

message: 'Topic was created and unsigned by 71.107.251.31' Kyros 08:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not redundant because one of them covers the promotions and the other covers the new WWE brand. --Trick man01 06:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They did overlap quite a bit until I reworded the other article and added it as a main link to the new promotion section of this article, after which the calls to merge had stopped.  --JFred 08:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: TWO PAGES FOR ECW IS ABSOLUTELY REDUNDANT.  CONSOLDIATE THESE, ASAP.

message: Just a heads up that at the time I was an annonymous user, but I was the one who updated the "Trademark" section with the info. on "Bring Your Own Weapon Night." There was a lot of untrue stuff in this section prior to my addition, mostly involving how ECW supposedly used full frontal nudity regularly including an all-naked team of women in response to the WWF divas. ECW was already on its way down the tubes when WWF pushed the diva angle to the fore front so this is way off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Claytonjames (talk • contribs) 
: Actually you're still anonymous since you forgot to sign the post.  Use four tildes at the end like this - ~ ~ ~ ~, without the spaces in between.  Thanks! BronzeWarrior 11:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bring Your Own Weapon Night 

message: The article as it stands currently links the reference to Sign Guy (of the three ECW Arena Guys) to Lou D'Angeli, who played Sign Guy Dudley. But aren't they different people? The reason I ask is because 1.) they look nothing alike, and 2.) they had a brief (and funny) feud where they would try to one-up each other with their signs. So perhaps it should be unlinked?
MattSutton1 19:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sign Guy 

message: Can someone provide a source that shows where Joel and Jose Maximo have been discussed as potential members of ECW? It seems particularly unlikely as they were never in ECW, and unlike CM Punk they don't appear to have the support of Paul Heyman nor anyone else in WWE, plus their stock hasn't been that high in recent years. --Kiltman67 16:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The SAT

message: I feel that it is important to point out the small size of the ECW ring compared with other promotions such as WCW and WWF.  While I do not know the exact dimensions I'm sure one of you guys do --Trick man01 02:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought it was just 18x18, the same as many Indies and WCW themselves I believe. Is it not more worth making a mention of ring size in the WWE article because it is in fact their 20x20 which is unusual, as many wrestlers say when making the move from the Indies up to WWE. --Kiltman67 20:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  From what I understand, ECW purchaced an older WCW ring that was then refurbished in Paul Heyman's backyard. If memory serves, Eastern Championship Wrestling bought it while still a member of the NWA, and used it until the federation folded. Therefore, it's an 18x18 ring. Crimson Ghost 05:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ring Dimensions

message: Where is Ecw going to air in Canada? We don't pick up the Sci-Fi Channel.
:As of now, theres been no news about where it'll air in Canada, if at all. ( And please sign your messages. ) DemonWeb 13:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does Velocity air in Canada?  Because rumor has it WWE is planning on replacing Velocity with ECW in international markets where Velocity still airs.  Of course, that's just a rumor for now, and nothing has been announced officially (then again, the Sci Fi thing was just a rumor at first, too). Jeff Silvers 17:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Velocity airs for us the same way as for the US, as an internet show on WWE.com, but the last rumor I read was that they were attempting to find someone to broadcast ECW for us in Canada.DemonWeb 18:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ecw in Canada 

message: Is this section actually needed? All the information would fit in just as well in the revival section. --Kiltman67 15:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Television Return

message: Is the XPW section needed? It really did nothing to further or hinder the promotion. Also, to my knowledge, most of the ECW documentaries do not even cover an attempt deal Kyros 05:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: XPW

message: There are a few things that could be changed, like the new WWE page not covering the Invasion or the documentaries, just the relaunch, and have the new WWE page be the main article for the relaunch section on this page.  --JFred 18:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, this page could do with a general cleanup according to WP:SS, but your proprosal is an excellent suggestion in that light.  This page ends up just being a summary of ECW with sub-articles providing the details. Big advantage is that it solves the 'size' issue.--Bobblehead 18:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Relationship between this page and ECW (WWE) page

message: I went ahead and archived some of the old stuff and the merge requests. I'll head over to Extreme Championship Wrestling (WWE) and do the same. --Bobblehead 16:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive created 

message: The article mentions an angle involving Raven and Sandman as being one of the most controversial in pro wrestling history, but it does not describe the angle even briefly. It would improve the article if someone knowledgeable of the angle elaborated on this. - KB 08:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crucifixion angle. 

message: Technically, WWE didn't buy ECW the promotion, just the video library and the right to the name and such, which happened post bankrupcy, so I don't think WWE should be listed as an owner of the promotion.  --JFred 01:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While it is true that WWE did not buy HHG Corp, it bought everything of value related to the ECW promotion.  It bought the video library, the trademarks and copyrights, etc. It even bought out the contracts of the top tier ECW talents.  Paul Heynman tried to get away with filing HHG Corp under a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, but it was converted to a Chapter 7. HHG Corporation was liquidated, ECW the promotion was not. If this article was about HHG, then there would be reason to have 2 articles, but it is about ECW. By purchasing everything related to ECW, WWE in all intents and purposes owns the ECW promotion. --Bobblehead 17:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, got it.  Did HHG own anything other than ECW?  I thought HHG was just the corporate name for ECW.  --JFred 00:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WWE "owning" the promotion 

message: *How come no mention of the Elk's Lodge in Queens, NYC?
*MSG Network used to show ECW shows on Saturday at 1 am, and Sunday at 2 am. Nyrmetros 21:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NYC 

message: WHo else thinks it's just hanging in as a brand? WWE is hardly mentioned in it and it hasnt been in any wwe games. i think that its just about to become its own wrestling bussiness. 
blitzer natu 01:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This has nothing to do with the article.  This is not a forum for discussion on ECW.  Mr. C.C. 07:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just Hanging In As  A Brand of WWE 

message: What day did ECW air on TV? I think this hould be added if not already in. Thanks User:George bennett (cba to sign in)82.44.161.102 13:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorry if I missed this in the article... 

message: "Wrestlers such as Shane Douglas, Tommy Dreamer, Raven, The Sandman, Cactus Jack, Terry Funk, Sabu, Mikey Whipwreck and Tazz were seen as being too dangerous for the multi-million dollar companies and were given a chance in ECW."
Could someone explain how Mikey Whipwreck (just to use one example) was considered too dangerous for a bigger company? --Citizen Sykes (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popularity 

message: $1 for Sabu? That doesn't make sense. Vandalism much? 70.49.207.133 (talk) 18:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Money Owed

message: I noticed that in the company box it has WWE listed as both a parent company and as the other part of a merger. I may be wrong, my knowledge of business isn't great, but are these not contradictory. Merger seems to imply the coming together of two companies to form something bigger, whereas parent implies an inequality between the participants, which is certainly true in this case as WWE basically came in and bought all the intellectual properties of a dead company. --Kiltman67 00:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest the merger part be removed, or changed to "Sold to" or "Bought by", and such. As you said, merger implies 2 units combining to, typically, create a third, unique entity. A more logical term would be that they were assimilated ( damn you Star Trek ) by WWE, not merged with them. Having WWE as the parent company, since they own ECW, makes more sense. DemonWeb 00:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say remove merger and leave it at that. The full details of how the parent company changed from HHG to WWE are always in the article itself. --Kiltman67 00:57, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Info in Company Box

message: How is that anyone could think just because Kristi touched Francine that it lead to the fight. I mean unless Kristi touched Francine in a sexual way it really isn't much different then a fan touching a wrestler.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.229.201 (talk) 04:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the whole XPW 

message: Am I stupid in thinking the whole thing could be put under one paragraph, lawsuit and all? 65.43.96.3 (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Mass Transit

message: This section reads like a Shane Douglas mark's version of events. Can someone rewrite this from NPOV and source their statements? 69.136.13.211 (talk) 00:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The info is factually correct and is sourced, I don't really see the problem. I am not a fan of Shane Douglas, but the info is correct. TJ Spyke 04:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Widthdrawing from the NWA 

message: The WCW page has this section, why not on the ECW page as well considering the pages exist on the ECW titles  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.240.233 (talk) 15:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because they have a current champion - Tommy Dreamer. Podgy Stuffn (talk) 09:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final Champions? 

message: He was the most popular character, and the grand finale of their 1998 pay per view.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.45.23 (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, well figure out a way to add him in. 65.43.96.3 (talk) 17:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  You can't have an ECW information page without mentioning Al Snow 

message: The banner claiming cites are needed is no longer required. I'm removing it. Podgy Stuffn (talk) 03:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banner removal 

message: Stop listing the WWE's ECW title year run on this page. This article details the original ECW and it's title runs, do not add the WWE runs after 2001. The ECW title, as it pertains to this article, did not exist after 2001. If you want to detail the second run, do so on the actual belt's article.151.203.5.23 (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:PW policy directs that the life span of the title be noted regardless. My suggestion to you is that you let it go.--UnquestionableTruth-- 21:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

text: To the IP, it's the same title and so the years the title was active should be listed here. It is false to say that the ECW Championship ceased to exist in 2001. TJ Spyke 22:10, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

text: WWE bias? I loved the original ECW. This about factual accuracy. The company may have folded in 2001, but the title continued. TJ Spyke 23:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: ECW title

message: ...the Sci Fi Channel?...
the Sci Fi Channel?! whaaaa?...—Preceding unsigned comment added by Viva43 (talk • contribs) 
I forget what site, but I swear I saw a site that stated that ECW is on SciFi because it relates to something like "exploding the imagination." 72.38.234.177 01:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be the other ECW show. ShawnIsHere: Now in colors 04:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Sci Fi Channel

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Extreme Championship Wrestling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100719090613/http://www.wrestleview.com/viewnews.php?id=1279252015 to http://wrestleview.com/viewnews.php?id=1279252015
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Extreme Championship Wrestling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100724012041/http://www.hardcorejustice.com/ to http://www.hardcorejustice.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120130121911/http://www.wrestleview.com/viewnews.php?id=1327678576 to http://www.wrestleview.com/viewnews.php?id=1327678576
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:27, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Why isn't this article at "ECW"? Per WP:COMMONNAME, we should use abbreviations where possible. The full name was only speriodically referred to as such outside the company. -- 92.21.89.60 (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why not. WWE gets to have the initials as the article title, therefore I am for this one being given the same respect. Also, please explain your usage of the word "speriodically". -- Wild Bilvis (talk) 13:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: @92.21.89.60, 73.76.55.98 (talk) 17:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initials?