Talk:WCW World Heavyweight Championship

May 2004

This page seems like a huge mess. Named the WCW World Heavyweight Title, yet people have added information and bits about the ECW, USWA, and others... they don't belong here, do they? This is suppose to be about the WCW World Heavyweight Title. If someone wants to mix them all together, which seems like a bad idea to me, this page should be redirected to something like Wrestling World Titles or something like that. Eric42 19:47, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Now that I look at the page again, I've noticed that it may have started off as a page about NWA or has been changed to reflect the lienage of the NWA Title Histories. I just hope that whoever realizes that the WCW World Heavyweight Title and the NWA Title are two completely seperate titles. I suggest reading this message board thread for more information about the titles. Eric42 19:52, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Just wanted to add, almost two years later, that this article is terribly short for such a great title (back before Bischoff/Nash/Russo.) I will attempt to make it better, but I don't know a lot about the title to expand it. Come on, someone help make this article better! Doesn't the WCW title deserve better? Eric42 01:29, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Error/Contradiction

This article contradicts itself. The top paragraph claims the phyical WCW World Heavyweight Championship belt is still in use today by the WWE as the World Heavyweight Title (which is false; the WWE is using a similar-looking but different belt), while the final paragraph states that the WWE's current World Heavyweight Championship is a completely different title with a different belt.

Wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.35.126 (talk) 07:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Sport vs. scripted entertainment

Why is this and other wrestling articles written as though dealing with a skill-based sport and not the scripted entertainment it is?

Because it takes away from the effect the entertainment has on the fans, or even observers, when one says, "Hulk Hogan jobbed to Ultimate Warrior cleanly," as opposed to "Hogan and Warrior gave it their all, but the Warrior truimphed." It's like a soap opera - you know Susan Lucci didn't get married 150,000 times, Erica Kane did. 64.241.230.3 15:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Merging Pages

They are virtually the same title design and do not over-run into one and another - therefore I am proposing this. Davnel03 18:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Opinions Here...

I feel that this page should be merged with WWE's World Heavyweight Championship page on wikipedia due to WWE's statement yesterday of the WCW title being a continuation of the World Heavyweight Championship. Big Boss 0 15:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I would be for it as long as the history of the title reigns and all that are not merged together as well. TonyFreakinAlmeida 18:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think the reigns can be merged as long as there is some kind of separation or indication of the Title’s name changes. For example, there should be a break between the Rock’s last "WCW" reign and Jericho’s “Undisputed" reign and a break between Lesner’s reign and Triple H’s first reign.--Prince Patrick 18:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Even though the WCW title was unified with the WWE title to create the Undisputed title, that doesn't make Lesnar's reign as Undisputed champion a WCW title reign, because it isn't one, it's a WWE title reign. If we're going to do this, it will have to be by WWE standards and what the WWE recognizes, we'd merge the pages, and keep the title reigns in separate pages. TonyFreakinAlmeida 19:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I thought, because of the “Undisputed” name, that all of the “Undisputed” Champions (from Jericho to Brock) were all considered “WCW” Champions and then the linage would continue to Triple H when the titles were “split”. I’m putting quotes around the word SPLIT for those of you who STILL believe that the belt Mr. Batista is holding is an “ALL NEW, ALL DIFFERENT” title from the WCW Title.--Prince Patrick 19:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well you have to look at it this way, the WWF belt and WCW belt represented the Undisputed title for about 4 months or so before the new belt was introduced. All Japan Pro Wrestling unified 3 titles to create their Triple Crown Championship, which is a single title, represented by 3 belts. WWE did the same thing pretty much with the Undisputed championship in the beginning. In my opinion, if the WWE says that the World Heavyweight Championship's lineage is connected to NWA and WCW titles, then the Undisputed title was "split" by Eric Bischoff. TonyFreakinAlmeida 19:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the Undisputed Title holders (Y2J, HHH, Hogan, Taker, Rock & Lesnar) held BOTH titles. Jericho and HHH (at wrestlemania) held both physical title belts and just because BOTH belts were replaced by a singular different physical title belt, that doesn't mean that the Undisputed Title only represented the WWE Title. If only one title was to be represented then it should logically have been the World Title; it was the World(WCW) champ Jericho that defeated WWE Champ Austin to unify the titles, so wouldn't it make more sense then that the WWE Title would be the one disapearing and absorbed into the World title and not the other way around? I mean that would be as if when I-C champ RVD defeated Tommy Dreamer to unify the I-C and Hardcore Titles, the Hardcore Title continued on instead of the I-C Title. I know WWE.com doesn't officially go along with this (yet) but it does make sense.Pretzolio@yahoo.com 19:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes but this isn't about your opinion or what you think makes sense, this is about what the WWE recognizes, and they do not recognize any of the Undisputed title reigns as WCW title reigns, because the WCW title was merged into the WWE title to create the Undisputed title. Why would the WWE throw away their own original championship in favor of another promotion's? That doesn't make sense, there have been other cases where the holder of the title that was discontinued after a unification held the title he had won, because it is simply how it's done. Another case, the WCW International World title was unified into the WCW World Championship, but guess which belt they kept as the WCW world title? The big gold, that at the time represented the International title. But once again, this is Wikipedia, and we have to go by what the WWE recognizes and not our personal opinions, and you also have to recognize that there is a difference between the term "title" and "belt" in professional wrestling.TonyFreakinAlmeida 20:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Pretzolio makes sense as far as what title should be used, but I think they recognized the WWE Title, as oppose to the World Title at the time of making it one physical belt, simply because that’s the company’s name. In the case of the IC title merging with the US, Hardcore and European Titles, I agree with you totally, but in the case of the World Titles, it’s just in the WWE best interest that the highest ranking, “most prestigious” title, would be there own. I think that may be the reason why they switched Cena and Bastita during that one draft and took their respective titles with them. They could have just easily given Batista the “Undisputed” version of the WWE Title when he went to Smackdown and call Cena’s spinning belt the World Heavyweight Championship. I feel the WWE had to put the WWE Title on their “flagship” program. The WWE is just as indecisive and probably can’t come to an agreement, just as much as we all can’t come to an agreement here on Wikipedia.--Prince Patrick 20:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes yes, I know what you mean with the brand switching of titles as all the original WWE titles are on Raw and the either new, or WCW(or NWA in the case of the World and US Championships)-era championships are on SmackDown, but if you look at it this way, if you're still going by belts, they kept the WCW belt active as representing the Undisputed title along with the WWF belt, and also I believe the tournament in 2001 to unify the titles was being referred to as the Undisputed WWF Championship, or WWF undisputed etc etc. I'm just saying that if you were in their situation, you'd keep your original championship in the spotlight too. The WCW title lost a lot of credibility in WCW's last couple of years with the many vacancies and titles drops and of course David Arquette and Vince Russo winning the title, the WWE wouldn't want to use a title with such an embarassing history as one of their own, this is also why I believe they didn't directly connect this title to their current World Heavyweight Championship. TonyFreakinAlmeida 21:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You’re right. When it comes down to it, it’s whatever the WWE says it is, regardless of opinion, and in the case of all of these title disputes (lineage, unification, Triple Crown, Grand Slam, etc.), logic. I agree to disagree on opinions. At least we agree on what's logical. Oh well!!--Prince Patrick 16:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

This shouldn't be merged with the WWE World Heavyweight Title unless WWE combines their title histories. As it stands on their site, they still have separate title history pages for the two belts, therefore they should be recognised as 2 separate titles. Lynx Raven Raide 11:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope. I think this page is still wrong, listing WCW Champions as Jericho and The Rock etc. They werent wrestling IN WCW, ON WCW TV, werent CONTRACTED BY WCW, and the belt was owned by the WWE. As far as I am concerned, and I know Im not alone, the last WCW Champ was Booker T. That was booked by WCW, on WCW TV, by WCW Contracted Wrestlers wrestling on tv in a WCW Sanctioned match. All other matches thereafter March 26th 2001, are not Official WCW Matches, so they cant be WCW World Heavyweight Champs. PLUS, adding to the fact, the article even says the WCW World Title was simply referred to as the "WCW Championship" which ISNT the WCW World Heavyweight Chapionship. Even the WWE werent recognising it by its TRUE title, so why is everyone else? User:he6rt6gr6m 01:35, 31 January 2008 (GMT)

When a company owns a title, they have the right to do whatever they want with it. They can unify it, they can deactivate it, or they can continue to use it for as long they want. When the WWF bought WCW they instantly became the owners of the title. Regardless of what you wish to believe, The Rock and Jericho ARE former WCW World Heavyweight Champions. I'm afraid this debate is pointless, as the sources have contradicted every word you've said. -- bulletproof ^3:16 03:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

According to the WWE DVD "The History of the World Heavyweight Championship" the WCW World and WHC titles are indeed one and the same. Including the months in which the WWF/E and (WCW) World titles were unified as the Undisputed Championship. There is no break in the linage. This is the official WWE historical film and thus should be followed. TheBoss1022

1991 post-Flair belt

According to various sources (including Wikipedia's article on The Great American Bash), after Flair jumped to the WWF with the Big Gold Belt, WCW used Dusty Rhode's Florida Heavyweight Championship belt to represent the title, replated (poorly) to remove the references to Florida. It would be beneficial to this article to find an image of this belt--either the replated version or the pre-replated version. Obviously the replated version would be more helpful, though I don't imagine any pictures of decent quality exist (if somebody has a tape of The Great American Bash 1991, maybe they could provide a vidcap?). As a last resort, an image of the Florida Heavyweight Championship belt without the new plating would suffice. Jeff Silvers 07:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I just realized that the belt is mentioned in this article, too. Hmm. Jeff Silvers 14:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

If I remember correctly there used to be a picture of the belt here, and I remember it just had a square plate over the main one that said WCW World Heavyweight Championship, don't know where that picture went though. TonyFreakinAlmeida 23:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Why does everyone say that Flair was paid the $25,000 by WCW and gave the title back? THIS NEVER HAPPEN!! HE STILL HAS THE BELT! NO MONEY WAS PAID TO HIM!! In the WWE DVD: Nature Boy Ric Flair - The Definitive Collection which was released in 2008. Flair said he was never NEVER paid the money plus intrest. Thus he ketp the title belt. Also the actual belt was given to Triple H by Ric Flair as a gift. Which they also talk about in the DVD. WCW however did try to sue so WWF stop showing it and did a fuzzy over the title. After Flair won the 1993 Royal Rumble. The Angle with the real world's champion was dropped. WCW did however make a new WCW Big Gold title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pres Burns (talk • contribs) 02:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I haven't seen the DVD and so don't know the context Flair was speaking in but he WAS repaid his deposit plus interest which is why he returned the Belt. The Belt he gave to Triple H was the "Vegas" Big Gold - A similar belt that the WWF had made for Flair during the lawsuit over the original. The original went back to WCW.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.120.137.173 (talk) 15:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The World Title(WWE)

Is this the same thing as the WCW World Heavyweight Championship? If so, the statistics need adjusting, and perhpas some sort of merger may be preferable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.245.136.217 (talk • contribs)

The World Heavyweight Championship currently defended on SmackDown! is not the same title as the WCW or NWA Championships. So no.-- bulletproof ^3:16 18:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

According to WWE's "The History of the WOrld Heavyweight Championship" DVD the titles are indeed one and the same. TheBoss1022 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.68.116.17 (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Free photograph of the other WCW World Title belt?

This article would really benefit from a (free) image of the other WCW World Heavyweight Championship belt (the one featuring the six stars on the middle plate). If anybody owns a replica of that belt and can take a photograph for the article, it would be greatly appreciated. Jeff Silvers 13:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Ask and ye shall receive.Bmf 51 05:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Major errors

After Flair no-showed several shows in 1991, WCW stripped him of the World Title. However, the NWA 9such as they were) continued to recognise Flair, so WCW made Luger-Windham for the WCW World Title. That is the creation of the separate belt right there. The diea that Flair was a double-world champion in early 1991 is fiction. 41.245.190.156 (talk) 13:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

True beginning and true first WCW World Heavyweight Champion.

Sting in 1990

This link:

http://members.chello.at/dietmar.kienboeck/title.htm

shows the true beginnings of the WCW World Heavyweight Title. It was written contemporaneously, unlike the current so-called "reliable" sources which were written much more recently and espouse WWE revisionist history. Bring Back The F (talk) 15:43, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Merge with WCW International World Heavyweight Championship

This should really be merged with the article on the regular WCW International World Heavyweight Championship that was borne out of the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. The information between the pages is nearly identical.

One article that explains the origins of the title, the spin off of the International championship due to Flair leaving/the separation from the NWA, and the separate short lived 6 star WCW World Heavyweight Championship would be a lot more fluid. JasonOT (talk) 06:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

No, this title and the International title were two separate World titles that splintered off from the NWA World Heavyweight Championship under two separate sets of circumstances in 1991 and 1993 respectively. They both co-existed together for several months in WCW during 1993-1994 and were eventually unified at Clash of the Champions XXVII on June 23 1994 when Ric Flair pinned Sting.2.24.71.58 (talk) 00:46, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

shortest reign

I noticed for the intercontinental championship section... that unifying a title isn't classified as a shortest reign so therefore chris jericho shouldn't have the shortest reign for the wcw world heavyweight championship... so who is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.252.32.154 (talk) 16:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

WCW had quite a few less than-a-day champions, but I'm fairly sure Hollywood Hogan's reign at Bash at the Beach 2000 was the shortest. Russo stripped him of the title within minutes. Can't recall an exact time, but I'll look into it and make the change. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:34, 14 January 2013 (UTC) Seems to be about 15 minutes between Hogan pinning Jarrett and Russo's rant. If anyone has a more precise time, feel free. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:46, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind what I said. Brainfart. Jericho won it from The Rock, then held it throughout the match with Austin. Also about 15 minutes. If Austin had won the match, his reign would have been 0 seconds. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

This article does not belong in Wikipedia

The very first sentence should make it clear that the article is about scripted entertainment. The second sentence should explain who decides who will "win" any given match. A naive reader could read the whole article and think it was about a fair athletic contest. Wikipedia has no business perpetuating that particular illusion. If fans of professional wrestling don't want to know the truth, they shouldn't look up the subject in Wikipedia. HowardMorland (talk) 04:04, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The very first sentence has a shiny blue professional wrestling link. That should clear things up, if anyone's still in the dark. Every article does the same. All in the Family is a sitcom. Gold is a chemical element. The forest raven is the largest member of Corvus in Australia.

If you know it's a show, why wouldn't most readers? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Starrcade '90 first WCW title match?

According to some accounts, this title was actually created at Starrcade '90 when Sting pinned the Black Scorpion in what was billed as the "first ever WCW World Title match" as well as an NWA World title defence. (In kayfabe theory, had Scorpion won by countout or DQ, then Sting would have still been NWA champion but Scorpion would have been WCW champion and the titles would have been split at this point.) Sting won and so became double-crown NWA/WCW champion, which he then lost to Ric Flair. The two titles were separated temporarily during Tatsumi Fujinami's reign (recognised by the NWA but not WCW) and then permanently when Ric Flair was stripped of the WCW title for leaving the company, but still recognised by the NWA as champion. If the sources can be found for this version of events, then this should be incorporated into the article. 2.24.71.58 (talk) 00:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

If it wasn't for WP:VNT I would happily paste the following text (with some tidying for encyclopedic style) into this article:

"Technically, the WCW World title was created at Starrcade '90. The Sting vs "Black Scorpion" (Ric Flair) bout, in addition to being an NWA World title match, was also to crown the newly created WCW title (hence the occasional mentions of "first ever WCW World title match" on commentary at the time.) Sting won the match and succesfully defended the NWA title while becoming first WCW champion and defended the title as a double-crown for the next few weeks, losing it as a double crown to Ric Flair in January. Except for a few days in the Spring where Tatsumi Fujinami had the NWA title while Ric Flair had the WCW title, the two titles remained a double crown until Flair left WCW on July 1st.

"The NWA doggedly continued to recognise Flair as champion unitl Sept 8th, two days before his first WWF match took place. Once it became apparrent that the title was going to be used as a gimmick in an outlaw promotion, the NWA stripped Ric Flair. The NWA toyed with the idea of awarding the title to WCW champion Lex Luger but instead kept it dormant until the following year when Masa Chono won a tournament in New Japan. Early in 1993 NWA champion the Great Muta visited the WCW territory and dropped his title to local top contender Barry Windham and thus the NWA title was once more based in the WCW territory until WCW went renegade in late '93. Between Sting's win over the Black Scoprion at Starrcade '90 and Rick Rude's win over Ric Flair, the NWA regarded the WCW title as WCW's top regional title (superceding the US title just as it in turn had superceded the old Mid Atlantic title as JCP's top title upon creation in 1975) irrespective of whether the title was held by the same wrestler or two different wrestlers.

"Incidentally, when the WWWF/WWF was an NWA member between 1972 and 1983, the NWA took exactly the same attitude to the WWWF/WWF title - it was regarded as the top regional title of the WWWF/WWF territory. Pedro Morales, Stan Stasiak, Bruno Sammartino, Superstar Graham and Bob Backlund were all regarded as the Northeastern opposite numbers of the holder of the US title in Mid Atlantic, the National title in Georgia, the Southern title in Florida etc etc etc, while the WWWF/WWF "World" tag team title was regarded as A.N.Other regional version of the NWA World Tag Team title - the JCP version only truly became the only NWA World tag team title. The WWF "World" title after August 1983 and the WCW "World" and "WCW International" "World" titles from fall 1993 onwards are all regarded by the NWA as three illegal outlaw "World" titles that have all been unified since late 2001." Romomusicfan (talk) 16:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Rename the article to WCW World Championship

WWE officially recognizes the WCW World Heavyweight Championship as the WCW World Championship. WWE owns World Championship Wrestling and all of it's property and trademarks. WWE has chosen to give the name WCW World Championship to the championship so Wikipedia needs to adjust and change the name of the article to "WCW World Championship" or else we are just simply misinforming the readers. The same would go for the article for the list of title reigns. Epicneter (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

That is a pretty affirmative statement and not how things work on wikipedia. You can propose a new name and attempt to get a consensus, but things are not demanded or else. - Galatz^Talk 20:57, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Rename the article to WCW World Championship?

I think we should rename the article to "WCW World Championship," my reasoning are as followed:

1.WWE officially recognizes this title as the "WCW World Championship".

2.If we were to not make this change, I believe we would be misinforming our readers as that is not the title's official name and that has not been the championship's name for over 16 years.

3. Most people refer to it as the "Big Gold Belt" or the "WCW World Championship" as it is. Epicneter (talk) 01:13, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

References

Based on the main article, we have the following history of the title

• WCW World Heavyweight Championship
  (January 11, 1991 – March 26, 2001)
• WCW Championship
  (June 24, 2001 – November 19, 2001)
• World Championship
  (November 19, 2001 – December 9, 2001)
• WCW World Championship
  (as the official name listed in WWE's website)

So it included the word World the entire time it was under WCW. In my opinion, WP:COMMONNAME would indicate we should stick with the current name, since that was the name that applied while it lived under WCW, rather than the shorter lived period of time during the WWE. - Galatz^Talk 01:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Galatz and I don't support a name change. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 02:24, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

On the beginning of the WCW World Heavyweight Championship

January 11 1991? Nope. During 1990, Sting was unambiguously referred to as the WCW World Heavyweight Champion. But, the "Apter mags" made an issue about still using the name "NWA". As a New Year's Resolution, as of January 1 1991 the London Publishing magazines started referring to Sting as the WCW World Heavyweight Champion. However, as Flair defeated Sting just 10 days later, the monthly magazines made it appear that the Apter publications' change of name recognition was only after Flair won the title. Title? Yes, in the singular. Flair was only "WCW" Champion. And articles pointed out that some people in Japan were recognizing Tatsumi Fujinami as WCW Champion. Flair was listed as being a 7-time NWA/WCW Champion(of course because the 84 "switches" with Race are 90s revisionist fiction). Flair was stripped of the WCW Title in July 1991,but still had possession of the physical belt. But it was just a belt, not a title recognition at all. The vacant WCW Championship was won by Luger, then Sting won his SECOND WCW Championship, then Vader, then Simmons. At this point New Japan announced they were crowning a new "NWA" Champion. The Apter mags pointed out that that was a terrible idea, as the title then held by Simmons was the same linear title held by Thesz, Race etc. In 1994, after legal proceedings, it was ruled that WCW had the right to refer to a single linear title, and title lineage and heritage, running from Orville Brown through to Hulk Hogan(at the time). So, who was the first WCW World Heavyweight Champion? Legally, WCW had every right to say it was Orville Brown in 1948. But the first person referred to as "WCW" Champion was Sting, not Flair. Saying "after Flair won the NWA Title on January 11 1991, he was also recognized as the first WCW Champion" is wrong on so many different levels.