Talk:List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions

List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 6, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
October 14, 2007	Featured list candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured list

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Professional wrestling Mid‑importance

	List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions is within the scope of WikiProject Professional wrestling, an attempt to improve and standardize articles related to professional wrestling. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, visit the project to-do page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to discussions.Professional wrestlingWikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestlingTemplate:WikiProject Professional wrestlingProfessional wrestling articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

† indicates reigns and title changes not recognized by WWE

I'm confused. This makes no sense. Why would WWE not recognize all but Flair's first title reign in WCW? In fact Flair is the one guy who they go out of their way to recognize ALL his World Title reigns. 24.178.211.155 (talk) 01:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me they don't go out of their way to regognize Flair's reigns. WWE doesn't recognize the Flair-Race NWA World Title switches in 1984 or the Flair-Fujinami NWA World Title switches in 1991, yet the NWA does. They also don't recognize the two WCW International World Title reigns. Two of Flair's WCW Titles are also not recognized, the first when WCW created the title and the match with Rick Steamboat in 1994. When a title is held up or vacated and then won, that starts a new reign. Despite the fact that Steamboat was never WCW Champ, the title was vacated, Flair won the rematch and it became a new reign, so there are 8 WCW Title reigns. Someone needs to fix this. MrNWA4Life 10:16, 25 July 2009

Debate over Benoit's reign

Let's get this clear once and for all - his reign IS recognised by WWE.com's WCW Championship history page. [1] I've altered the page to reflect that fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.76.65.77 (talk) 10:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Benoit was a WCW Champion. He won the championship at a ppv the left WCW the next day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.117.49.133 (talk) 00:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, and thrice no. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.87.101.19 (talk) 14:27, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sting

The first WCW World Champion was Sting. In late 1990, Sting, the reigning NWA World Champion, was recognized as the first WCW World Champion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.245.155.201 (talk) 07:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is true. This link:

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

shows the TRUTH. It was written in 1999, unlike the current "reliable" sources which are WWE revisionism. Bring Back The F (talk) 15:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, but neither you nor the linked article quite get the whole truth. Sting's match against the "real" Black Scorpion (Ric Flair in a mask) at Starrcade '90 was billed as being BOTH an NWA World title defence by champions Sting against challenger Scorpion and a "first ever WCW World Title match" between Sting and Scorpion. In kayfabe theory, if Sting had been counted out or DQ'd in this match then he would be NWA champ but Scorp/Flair would be WCW champ. In the event, Sting won the match and succesfully defended the NWA title and also became the inaugural WCW champion and the two titles were defended by Sting and lost to Flair on Jan 11 and thereafter defended by Flair as a double crown championship. There was a temporary split between the NWA and WCW title with the Fujinami storyline and a more permanent split when Flair left WCW. All this was downplayed by WCW and the Aprtermags which treated NWA as the old name for WCW.

Basically it was a loophole created by WCW in December 1990 in case there was a future falling out between WCW and the NWA over the direction of the World title (WCW would want what was best for itself, whereas the NWA would be likely to stick up for its other members.

The NWA World title has gone through several more schisms in its time since then - firstly when Ric Flair claimed to be Real World's Champion in the WWF even after being stripped by the NWA (Flair's claim was effectively unified with the WWF title when he won it at Royal Rumble '92) - then next when WCW left the NWA in 1993 and the title Flair lost to Rick Rude was labelled the WCW International World title (later unified with the main WCW title wnich in turn was unified with the WWF title) then when EasternCW heavyweight champ Shane Douglas threw down his newly won NWA belt and declared himself ECW World Champion, and finally with the NWA/TNA split in 2007. 62.190.148.115 (talk) 12:26, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Debate over WWE lineage

The debate was ended after WWE posted their World Heavyweight Title, title history on WWE.com. I'm going to edit that part. SilentRage 18:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WWE's 2009 release of "The History of the World Heavyweight Championship" DVD re-opened the debate as the DVD clearly recognizes the WHC and WCW World titles as one and the same (even going so far as to repeat WCW's false claim that the title's history goes back to 1905)TheBoss1022.

Let's address this again. According to not one but TWO OFFICIAL WWE historical DVDs ("The History of the World Heavyweight Championship" and "The History of the WWE Championship") the months when WWF/E recognized the "Undisputed" Championship was a continuation of the linage of the WCW World Heavyweight championship.

In "The History of the World Heavyweight Championship" DVD (Which also claims that the WHC and WCW World titles are indeed one and the same - but that's another argument for another time) the linage is clearly chaptered and the "Undisputed title" is even listed specifically as period of linage.

In "The History of the WWE Championship" Jim Ross says that Ric Flair presented then Undisputed Champion with a new title belt to recognize "BOTH" (WWE and WCW) championships.

"Recognizing" a title by a belt design doesn't mean the belt represents that title. It's more of an homage, like how WWE's Great American Bash recognizes WCW, but is not a WCW PPV. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Therefore clearly the "Undisputed" World Championship is a continuation of the linage of BOTH the WWE and WCW World Championships. TheBoss1022

I don't think so. WWE.com says that the last champion was Jericho. http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wcwchampionship Also, the WWE Undisputed Championship it's the same that the WWE Championship. Triple H profile never says that he won the WCW World Championship, only the WWE Championship (once as Undisputed, obviusly) and the World Heavyweight Championship (the WWE version, in the section Birth of a title, you can read the first ever WHC). I think that the WWE.com history title and WWE profiles are better soucres than a DVD. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like I've said on your Talk Page, Boss, exact quotes and times would be helpful. The WHC DVD set covers three titles known as the World Heavyweight Championship, but clearly distinguishes between them. Disc One is about the NWA World Heavyweight Championship, Disc Two is about the WCW World Heavyweight Championship and Disc Three is about the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. They are all loosely connected, but no reliable title history treats all three as one title. Without an explicit (not merely implied) claim to the contrary, this can't even be considered as an exceptional claim. Do you have this explicit claim? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:48, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WWE.com is not a reliable source for the simple reason that there are several omissions on their lists. Another notable one is Antonio Inoki's WWWF World title win over Backlund. Plus the fact that the WCW World title and WHC have been referred to as one and the same on TV, in WWE magazines and on WWE DVDs. WWE.com is a kayfabe site that only reports what is "official" Wikipedia is a historical site which tries to give the COMPLETE history. In today's information era what ACTUALLY happened trumps what "officially" happened anyway. But the fact that WWE has acknowledged that the titles are indeed one and the same on so many different occasions shows that it is also "officially" the same. In the DVD "The History of the World Heavyweight Championship" Triple H states that they "brought back" the championship indicating that it was indeed the same title. Furthermore when Bischoff awarfded the title to Triple H he referred to him as the "World Champion" (not World HEAVYWEIGHT Champion) showing that they were still using the name change from before the unification. Again showing the evolution of the title. TheBoss1022 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBoss1022 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, but are you crazy? WwE.com isn't reliable? It is the website of the company, it is the most reliable source. Are you saying that the WWE website isn't reliable but a WWE DVD is it? Sorry, but WWE.com it's a reliable source because it is the company that held the championship. Wrestling is a scripted sport entertainment, so it is the WWE story. If WWE.com says that Hardcore Holly never was IC Champion, he never was IC Champion.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then why does it contradict it's own history? It doesn't even list punk's WWE title reign as continuing after he left with the belt. Even though Triple H clearly said on RAWthat BOTH men (Punk & Cena) were recognized as champion (which is the reason Wikipedia recognizes that Punk's reign continues) WWE.com says that he was not. Plus the Inoki omission. This shows that there are many errors in that site. Plus WWE has released multiple DVD (which are the OFFICIAL DVDs) of the titles' histories as well as a title history magazine all of which says the linage continues. TheBoss1022 — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBoss1022 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1, WWE.com list the Punk's regin as One. You can see the champions. http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wwechampionship/25026075 From July 17 until August 14, (SummerSlam). 2, WWE don't recognices Inoki as a champion, the end. It his story, Inokiwon a match, but WWE never recogniced as champion. Why the WWE DVD are official and WWE.com aren't? WWE made both thing. Also, InedibleHulk says that the DVD it's about 3 different championships, NWA, WCW and WWE. Also, you'll never seen that Lesnar or HHH was WCW champions, because at Vengance 2001, WCW Championship was desactivated.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You don't see them as "WWE champions" because at the time they were known as the "Undisputed" champion which was the WCW and WWE titles combined. When the titles were separated they were again referred to by the individual championship. I didn't say that WWE.com was not official I pointed out that it was full of flaws. You have yet to show how the DVD (and thus the footage of the events taking place in front of your eyes) is incorrect. Therefore the lineage has been established by WWE.

Also the DVD never once says that they are referencing three different championships. In fact Triple H refers to the WHC as the same title held by Ric Flair, Dusty Rhodes and Harley Race. While true the NWA World title and it's history are different from WCW's title history, claiming that it is the same (as WCW once did) shows that WWE does indeed recognize the WCW and WHC as one and the same.

And your link says nothing about wwe recognizing two guys holding the WWE title at the same time. As I said another error on WWE.com's part — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheBoss1022 (talk • contribs) 20:44, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stop. It's enough. I tried to explain to you that the WWE.com history is the official history, no mistakes. All the sources says that the unification created a single championship, no two championships at the same time. Unification for one single major unified world championship (later renamed WWE Championship. That's why Jericho is listed as WWE Champion, no Unified Champion. But you'll never see HHH or Lesnar as WCW Champions.). Did you understand the CM Punk sources? More simple. CM Punk won the title from July 17 until August 14. Also, WWE. com says that Rey Mysterio held the title on July 25. Oh, magic. TWO champions at the same time. Also, John Cena held the title from July 25 until August 14. More magic, WWE.com says that John Cena and CM Punk were champions at the same time. Inoki soucre. You'll never see that WWE says that inoki was WWE champion because WWE don't recogniced his regin. No mistake, only storyline. http://www.wwe.com/superstars/antonioinoki Finally, InedibleHulk says that all the sources says that Jericho was the final WCW Champion and Hulk added sources proving it. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You stop. I have history, video footage of the actual events and of WWE talent supporting that the linage continues as well as an official historical documentary supporting that the linage continues. Show me where in Wikipedia where the rule is that WWE.com is 100%. And if that's the case why are you not changing the histories of ALL the WWE titles to fit WWE.com?(TheBoss1022 (talk) 01:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

We can't be much clearer about this, Boss. If you continue to disrupt the article, you'll be given an official warning. If you disregard the warning, you'll probably be blocked. We'd both rather you just drop it, until you have stronger evidence. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC) Sorry I've been away. I've been battling the flu. Then tell me what kind of evidence is considered strong enough? What is stronger than an official DVD that tells the official history of the championship complete with video evidence? No I won't drop it because wikipedia states "If you can update or improve it, please do so." (TheBoss1022 (talk) 01:45, 26 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Here's the video evidence. It's cheaply made but it suits the purpose. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f0XUwQ6_30&feature=youtu.be It contains the key footage from both the previously mentioned DVDs. You will see where the first DVD clearly lists the WCW World and WHC World titles as one and the same. But more importantly the second DVD shows Jim Ross clearly explain that the Undisputed championship represented both (WWE & WCW) titles proving that the title has always been active and did not end with Jericho. (TheBoss1022 (talk) 22:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

You owe me eight minutes. When Bischoff says "You may recognize this championship", he means "championship belt". No, he doesn't say "belt", but he does say "recognize" and "worn by". You can't wear or recognize the championship itself. As for Jim Ross, he says "A few months later, Triple H won the title again". Not titles. The belt represents both titles the way the American flag represents cornfields and soldiers, not the way the WWE Championship belt represents the WWE Championship. ~~Let's just say you're right, though: Where is the WCW Championship now? Is it part of the WWE Championship or is it the entire World Heavyweight Championship?~~ (Nevermind, you've answered that on your talk page) InedibleHulk (talk) 05:56, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Ross said "title" as in singular because the WWF and WCW titles were unified into a single title, the "Undisputed" championship. But as Ross also said, the "Undisputed title represented both titles showing that the WCW/WHC title was still active during this time. And how can Bischoff have meant "belt"? It was a different belt by that point which had been worn by no one at that point. (TheBoss1022 (talk) 03:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Here's yet another official WWE source that says the titles are the same, the official wwe history of championsh magazine. http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/62365_465692423491547_947930717_n.jpg

Notice how it claims that when Triple H was awarded the WHC he was given the renamed WCW world title. http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/62365_465692420158214_1632153988_n.jpg So I have three official WWE historical sources (two DVDs and a magazine) to your one source (WWE.com). The majority of official sources say the titles are one and the same. At the very least there is enough evidence to restore the Undisputed title history. (TheBoss1022 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 00:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, but not. Your magacine says that bischoff resurected the wcw championship and renamed whc, but dont says that the wcw was active as a undisputed championship. Also, you cant upload a video to youtube as a source. Again, in wwe.com bios, you'll never see that hhh, lesnar or taker won the wcw championshp.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We need a proof that the wcw was active until 2002. No "maybe you'll recogniced this title". Now, wwe.com say that theclast wcw champion was jericho, 3 bios say that the wcw championship wasn't active as part of the undisputed championship, (lesnar, hhh and taker). Solies titles history, another realibe source used bu the wikiproject, also say that the title was desactivated in 2001. Pwtorch and pwinsider talk about a unification.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WWE owns WCW and therefor they have the right to use the title however they see fit. If they choose to release a DVD about their titles histories that says the undisputed title represents both titles, or that the WHC and WCW titles are the same (thus stating that the title linage continues) then that's the way it is. And your claim that I can't show the footage from the official DVDs is ludicrous. That's like saying you can't use original film to prove the holocaust happened. (TheBoss1022 (talk) 20:48, 29 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

I told you. Give a source that says that the WCW Championship was active until 2002. If HHH, Taker and Lesnar didn't won the championship (you can see by yourself in the WWE.com) it's means that the WCW Championship was desactivated. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument is all over the place. You say the Undisputed title was both WWF and WCW titles, then you say Bischoff "resurrected" the title for Triple H. If it was already over on SmackDown and Lesnar was the WCW champion, it wouldn't need to be resurrected, would it? You're taking the word "represent" the wrong way, from a self-published source, and expect that to overrule the many secondary (and self-published) sources explicitly stating otherwise. This is simply not going to work. Heed the warning on your talk page, and move on. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

He "resurected" it as a single title. He stripped Lesnar of the WCW/WHC title (leaving him with just the WWE title) and brought it to RAW. Even WWE.com says that the title was "brought" to RAW after Lesnar had taken it to Smackdown. http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/worldheavyweight

Actual quote: "The World Heavyweight Championship was brought to Raw by then-General Manager Eric Bischoff after WWE Champion Brock Lesnar became exclusive to SmackDown". Says nothing about the WHC or WCW title being on SmackDown. Just the WWE Champion. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plus WWE.com also says that "Prior to Sept. 2, 2002, WWE recognized only one World Champion...", The Undisputed Champion "...and that champion represented both RAW and SmackDown!" http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/worldheavyweight/3044541431

And then there were two WWE world champions. Nobody's arguing that. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WWE.com even makes the same claim as WCW that the WHC goes all the way back to 1904, "The World Heavyweight Championship that has recently been carried by such greats as Batista and Triple H got its start in WWE back in 2002. But its prestigious lineage can actually be traced back all the way to George Hackenschmidt and 1904. For years, it was known as the NWA Championship; then when WCW pulled out of the NWA in the early 1990s, Ric Flair was recognized as the first-ever WCW Champion." While WWE does not own the NWA and thus can't claim the NWA heritage, it does own the WCW and thus can (and does) claim that the WCW and WHC titles are one and the same. http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wcwchampionship

Again, any hint of meaning this comment has is vastly outweighed by all the title histories, including the official one immediately below it, which starts with Flair and ends with Jericho. Not sure how you consider the first bit of the source gospel and then disregard the main part. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In addition WWE.com also claims that Chris Jerricho is STILL the WCW World champion showing that wwe.com is either outdated or that the WCW title is still active. http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wcwchampionship/3044541104 (TheBoss1022 (talk) 01:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Just a mistake. Triple H's page for his Intercontinental title unification over Kane also says "-present". I hope you don't start arguing he's still the IC champ next. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:58, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, HA! then you admit that WWE.com is full of errors. Therefore seeing as how it's the ONLY official WWE source that doesn't prove me right (and as I've shown on several occasions it DOES support what I've been saying)it's clear that not listing the titles as one and the same is just another error on WWE.com. By your own admission your source is flawed. (TheBoss1022 (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

I said there are two errors. Not full. Regardless of whether WWE.com is pure bullshit or not, every secondary source (which Wikipedia prefers over primary sources, by the way) also says your theory is bullshit. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:00, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Again. Can you give us a source saying that the WCW Championship was active until 2002 and the last champion was Lesnar? No? Then, shut up. This discussion took to much time. We have near 5 sources, you have YOUR interpretations about Jim Ross and Eric Bischoff commentaries.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was no "last" champion WCW Champion. That's the whole point. Even WWE.com doesn't say there was a last WCW champion. The title is still active now renamed the World heavyweight championship. ALL WWE sources say this is true. And you can't show me a single one that says otherwise. (TheBoss1022 (talk) 22:56, 30 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wcwchampionship WC TItle, 1991-2001 http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/worldheavyweight WWE World Heavyweight Championship 2002-Present. Same belt, two different titles. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, SEVERAL different belts, same title. The first link states that the WHC title's history goes back through the years it was known as the WCW World title. The second link says that Bischoff "brought" said (WHC/WCW)title to RAW from smackdown (where it was held by Brock lesner as part of the Undisputed championship). So both of your links state that the title existed before it was awarded to Triple H. (TheBoss1022 (talk) 23:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Further prove that WWE.com recognizes the WHC and WCW titles as one and the same http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wwechampionship/25026075

When Punk won the WWE title for the first time on July 17, 2011 it's states that "CM Punk's victory made him only the third Superstar in history to hold each the ECW, World Heavyweight and WWE Titles". But as of that time only Kane had also held all three. If the WHC was indeed a new title then Big Show didn't win it until 12-18-11. But WWE.com already recognized him as winning all three showing that they indeed consider the WCW and WHC as one and the same. CHECK AND MATE! (TheBoss1022 (talk) 23:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Again, the source never says that the WCW Championship was active since 2001 until 2002 and HHH, Taker and Lesnar were WCW champions. Again, two different title histories. We have the http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/unitedstates USA Title. It is the WCW United States Heavyweight Championship because both titles histories (WCW/INVASION and WWE are one). Again, WCW United States Championship was desactivated and reactivated as the same title, because it has the same title history, WCW and World Heavyweight Champions haven't. Again, you haven't to proove that the WHC is linked with the WCW Championship, the NWA or the Original WHC, you must to proove that the WCW Championship was active until 2002 and HHH, Taker and Lesnar were recogniced as WCW Champions.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did prove it. I told you how WWE documented the history on two DVDs. You were too lazy to watch so I even posted a clip of said videos. When Jim Ross stated that Ric Flair presented Triple H with a new belt to represent both championships, that is WWE directly saying that the title was active.

Further more on the ECW title list Ezekiel Jackson is ststed as the "last" ECW champipon http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/ecwchampionship/13528698 But at the end if the WCW list it does NOT state that Jericho was the last WCW champion just the first "undisputed" champion. http://www.wwe.com/classics/titlehistory/wcwchampionship/3044541104 (TheBoss1022 (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Again, you have your interpretation about an ambiguous Jim Ross' commentarie. I give you a title history. Where does the list end? In 2001, with Jericho as the last champion. End of discussion. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And as I (and you) have pointed out, the list on WWE.com are full of flaws. What other meaning could Jim Ross have had when he said that the Undisputed title represented both championships? (TheBoss1022 (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

As I've already told you twice, "represent" means to bring clearly before the mind, as in "a book which represents the character of early America". If you're asking again, it means you're either willfully ignoring or honestly misunderstanding something. Instead of dragging this on, re-read what every other editor has already said, carefully. I've nothing more to say that isn't there already. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:00, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will not play your game. If I say to you what I think about Jim Ross' commentarie, it'll be my personal interpretation. I give you facts. Primary and secondary sources say that WCW Championship was desactivated at Vengance 2001 with Chris Jericho as the last champion. This sources are realibles and transparent like water. I will not continue this converation, it's useless and we give you a lot of sources saying that your are wrong and you only give us 3 personal interpretations about commentaries that you link. Your "sources" don't say DIRECTLY that the WCW Championship was ACTIVE from 2001 until 2002, only say thing like "you'll recogniced this title", "represents both companies". The end. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is no longer "my game" as you put it. as recently as yesterday WWE put out a video package listing former WCW/NWA champions as former WHC champions. That can be seen here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a2enU9kcFI#at=261 At this point every single source from WWE (save for WWE.com) recognizes the WCW and WHC title as one and the same. The time has come for wikipedia to do the same. (TheBoss1022)

"The uploader has not made this video available in your country. Sorry about that."

As much as I'll probably regret asking, can you explain how you came to this conclusion? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:31, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Table tweak?

Regarding this edit, I'm not big on Nheques' format (small font, vacancies in prose form), but I do like the idea of more clearly setting the vacancies apart from the reigns. Anybody have thoughts on colouring those lines grey (or some other colour) to do that? I think it would better convey where the interruptions in direct lineage occur, and that this is useful in understanding a title history. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a solution in search of a problem. It's not like people are getting confused thinking "Vacant" won the world title a couple times. Feedback ^☎ 16:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I sure hope not. More of a visual cognition thing. Vacancies are breaks in lineage, like gaps in a bridge. Sometimes they last a day, sometimes years. Sometimes they happen for big reasons and sometimes for bullshit. Either way, they break the "chain" into smaller chains, which aren't so apparent right now. Yes, people can read that Savage didn't beat The Giant for the title at World War 3, and all the rest, but it helps to see these different direct "sublineages" too. In any case, no champion is a very distinct thing from any champion, so it seems like it should be made distinct just for that.

On a related note, shouldn't the length of the vacancies be noted? They're all at 0. I get nobody "held" the title like the column says, but readers will know what it means. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I brought this up before and the consensus was to not add them. I still think it's the right call to add them. Feedback ^☎ 21:33, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to change the table, first change ALL the tables. Again, I can see different tables in WWE Titles, Japanese Titles, Puerto Rico titles... --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I'd thought of that. Not changing anything yet, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flair's second reign

The title was held up after Spring Stampede 1994 and when Flair won the rematch at Saturday Night, he was only once called 12-time World Champion, WCW quickly went back to 11-time because the title was never actually vacant. Flair wins at Saturday Night and retains the title and gets the belt back, that's the way WCW saw it and WWE and PWI still see it this way. Someone should edit it.

(my first 10 minutes on Wikipedia as a member, I hope this actually gets posted where it's supposed to get posted and someone actually sees it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WrestlingLegendAS (talk • contribs) 01:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:24, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of WCW World Heavyweight Champions. 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/20071010022633/http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wcw/wcwhist.htm to http://www.100megsfree4.com/wiawrestling/pages/wcw/wcwhist.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:41, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Benoit was never WCW World Heavyweight Champion

The match at Souled Out 2000 was clearly and unambiguously a Dusty Finish. This article even acknowledges that WCW never recognised Benoit as a former WCW World Heavyweight Champion. So, why recognise him? Apparently, because WWE (long after the event), chose to retroactively this Reign That Never Was. So, WWE Revisionism is King? Except this discussion page is almost entirely about how WWE can't change the facts years after the event! Another well-known fact is that when WWE purchased the AWA, Vince McMahon chose to retroactively recognise Hulk Hogan as a 2-time AWA World Heavyweight Champion,,overturning HIS two Dusty Finish "victories"(and making Nick Bockwinkel a 6-time AWA World Champion in the process). Yet, virtually nobody considers Hogan to be a 2-time AWA World Champion today! How are Hogan's 2 AWA, and Benoit's 1 WCW reigns different then? Simple. The iwc marks hate Hogan, plain and simple. They attempt to smear and undermine his reputation and achievements all the time. While Benoit, who killed his own family, is respected by the same group of people! Simple fact: Benoit never won the WCW Wirld Championship. WCW never recognised him as a former Champion. Period.

Link here..

https://web.archive.org/web/20000817233603/http://www.wcw.com/2000/superstars/world/

Unfortunately some revisionism has already crept in, but we do still see that A) Chris Benoit was never World Champion B) Bret Hart is a 1-time WCW Champion C) Sid Vicious is a 1-time WCW Champion

and another one.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010207213805/http://www.wcw.com/2001/superstars/titles/world/

Note the title went from Booker T to Kevin Nash, back to Booker T, and then to Scott Steiner.

and even this is not all. I saw someone had saved a screenshot of the WCW Title from before Booker win the title at BATB. At that point the title was listed as, going from Jarrett winning it at Slammiversary 2000, to Ric Flair on Nitro, back to Jarrett at a later Nitro, and then Booker beating Jarrett at BATB. The entire "Flair has a seeming heart attack, Jarrett is given the belt, Nash wins the belt, but gives it back to Flair" was all unofficial, and NOT recognized as actual title changes. Apparently, only later when WCW wanted to recognize Flair as a "16 time World Champion", they added the Race-Flair '84 switches(which never happened), the 94 vacancy and regaining(which never happened), and then recognizing a Russo multi-swerve angle as actual title changes. In fact, something very similar had happened with the WCW World Tag Team Title in 1998, where multiple teams seemingly won and lost the Tag Team Championship, only for WCW to officially recognize an earlier team as having been Champions all along.

To recap, Chris Benoit was never WCW World Champion. Bret Hart and Sid Vicious are both ONE-time WCW World Champions. Kevin Nash is a THREE-time WCW World Champion. Vince Russo was NEVER OFFICIALLY WCW World Champion. Jeff Jarrett is a TWO-time WCW World Champion. When WWFE bought out WCW, and before the last Nitro had aired, Booker T was at that stage a TWO-time WCW World Champion. And, if we go by WCW, and the idea that the NWA World Title effectively became the WCW World Title, then from 1981-2000, Ric Flair won the NWA/WCW World Title TWELVE times.(This excludes the 1993 victory over Barry Windham.)

Multiple problems with article

1) The WCW World Heavyweight Championship didn't start in 1991. It was only in January 1991 that PWI started referring to Ric Flair as "WCW World Heavyweight Champion". So, PWI's usage of terms dictates WCW title history?

2) The title was never vacated in 1994.

3) WCW never recognized Chris Benoit as a former WCW World Heavyweight Champion. Officially, the main event of Souled Out 2000 ended in a "no contest". Only years later did WWE decide to recognize Benoit as having held the WCW World title. But he never did.

4) May 2000...officially the title went from DDP to Arquette to Jarrett to Flair to Jarrett..next stop Bash at the Beach. Yes, we saw seeming title changes, but then look at the WCW World Tag Team Title in 1998. That's how WCW themselves recognized it at the time. Period.

This whole article seems to allow others(eg. PWI and WWE) to dictate WCW's title history, even when it completely and utterly contradicts what WCW themselves acknowledged at the time.

Second, it seems to have been written by an obsessive Ric Flair mark. "First WCW Champion..Ric Flair", "let's recognize Flair vacating, then regaining the title in 1994", and the 2000 nonsense. All to get Flair's world title numbers up. Same with the kind of people who recognize the Flair-Race NWA "switches" in 1984 that never happened. Or the Fujinami "switches" in 1991, again that never happened.

In truth, Flair is either a 15-time( if we count 1993 NWA as a "World" title) or a 14-time(if we don't) World Champion.

Why is there a 1994 "vacancy"?

This was definitely not recognized in 1994. And it ain't recognized by WWE now 197.89.23.184 (talk) 16:21, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning of WCW World Heavyweight Championship

In 1948, the NWA World Heavyweight Championship began. In 1988 JCP was bought by Turner and renamed WCW. WCW was really the last remaining NWA territory. In 1990 Sting won the NWA Championship. Later that year, as part of branding, Sting was referred to as WCW World Champion. But, it was the same title. The London/Apter magazines still referred to him as NWA Champion. In 1991 Flair won his seventh World Title, and at this point PWI and the rest agreed to call Flair WCW Champion rather than NWA Champion. But Sting had definitely been WCW Champion. The Fujinami Dusty finish occurred. Nobody recognized Fujinami in 1991. Then Flair was stripped of the WCW Title(the only Title he held) for missing dates. But he still had the belt. Luger beat Windham for the vacant WCW Title. There was nothing in 1991 about "but the NWA still recognizes Flair". Luger dropped the WCW Title to Sting, who then dropped it to Vader. The title Vader held in 1992 was the same title that Thesz, Race and Rhodes had held. Then New Japan announced plans for a new "NWA" title. This was heavily criticized. Chono and Muta held this title that no one recognized as being the same title. Then New Japan relinquished it to WCW. Windham and Flair held it too. Then it was abandoned. But some indie promoters kept it going. Everyone in the 90s knew what the real linear title was. Ric Flair was not the first WCW Champion in 1991. He wasn't even the first person to be called WCW Champion. 197.89.23.184 (talk) 08:04, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And a legal decision in 1994 stated that Thesz, Race, Funk etc. were all former WCW Champions. It is absurd for revisionist "history" to state that "After winning the NWA Title in 1991, Flair was also recognized as the first WCW Champion". That single statement is wrong on multiple levels, yet it's trotted out by people who clearly weren't following things at the time...

The "recognized by WCW" page

https://web.archive.org/web/20010207213805/http://www.wcw.com/2001/superstars/titles/world/

So, yeah. Feel free to remove Benoit, Russo, make Bret have one title, remove one of Nash's, one of Jarrett's, one of Booker's, list DDP and Arquette as co-champions etc.

Or maybe... 197.86.195.234 (talk) 10:59, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Kevin Nash for sure. Why does this article say that WWE recognizes that reign? Even WWE doesn't. I am looking at their WCW title history and that reign is not there. So nobody recognizes it. Why does Wikipedia?2003:CE:D733:9A55:431:3B58:29CC:C5B9 (talk) 20:36, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First Champion was Sting...

https://web.archive.org/web/20120305172112/http://members.chello.at/dietmar.kienboeck/title.htm 197.86.195.234 (talk) 06:53, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can we remove Nash's reign?

WWE does not recognize his 2000 reign where he awarded himself the title. In similar cases we go by what WWE says. We should do the same here. WrestlingLegendAS (talk) 00:34, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]