Talk:WWE Women's Championship (1956–2010)/Archive 1

Discussion

"Despite conflicting reports that say a champion must defend their title at least every month, Trish Stratus has currently held the women's title for nearly nine months with a mere two televised title defences, as one came on an edition of RAW in February 2005, and the other one came at WrestleMania 21 in April 2005. However, it has been known for WWE to only remeber this rule when they want to. "

THIS RULE WAS ONLY DECLARED BY WCW. THERE SEEMS TO BE NO REPORT OF THAT RULE EVER MENTIONED BY WWE

How about when Eric Bishoff stripped Edge of the intercontinetal title due to the fact he could not defend it within the thirty day rule --- Paulley 13:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It has rarely been brought up in the Women's title (due to the depth of the women's roster or perhaps due to the smark opinion that Trish is better than everyone else), but it is frequently invoked for the men's belts (again, only rarely - WWE is not likely to mention Batista and the 30-day rule together due to Batista currently working injured and the passing of Eddie Guerrero). kelvSYC 22:37, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I myself would dispute the assertion that Trish Stratus has only defended her title twice during her current (sixth) reign. She defended it at Taboo Tuesday in the Fulfill Your Fantasy match, defeating Ashley, Mickie James, Maria, Candice Michelle and Victoria. She defended it against Melina at Survivor Series. And I'm sure she's defended it a few times on free TV, too. ekedolphin 08:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

However, during the current reign Trish underwent surgery, which with the men's belts normally means that the title would have been somehow stripped beforehand. But yes, most of Trish's post-surgery matches have been title events (but it brings up the point that they may be so dull that no one remembers them as such). kelvSYC 01:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see right now in the trivia section, that Debra's "violation" of the 30-day rule is listed. If so, should we also bring back Trish's and Stephanie's violations. In addition to all the Trish talk above, Steph barely had any defenses during her nearly 4+ month reign. ErikNY 16:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Jazz is the only black woman in WWE history to retain the women's title at Wrestlemania." Isn't this bit of trivia pointless? Considering that there's only been two black women's champions in the history of the title and I don't think Jacqueline ever defended it at Wrestlemania, I'd say so. Mr. Papaya 00:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Theres a rumor going around that at Taboo Tuesday, the annual Fulfill your fantasy battle royal will be for the vacant Women's title.

Link officially declaring title vacant for the time being. Though they are building up a program between Mickie and Lita I will not add it since it counts as week by week. [1]. Zdunne 22:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From JR's commentary on 18th September RAW it certainly seems like they are going to fill the title again soon. I think they might just be trying to get the crowd to take women's matches more seriously, and build up a few possible angles to keep interest up, before they do it. Night Bringer 16:04, 21 September 2006 (GMT +10)

Here is the link of the official announcement of the finals at Cyber Sunday [2]. User:Zdunne: Zdunne 10:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

8 woman?

i know they call the tourny 8 woman but theres only 7 diffrent woman, thats weird

thats why they got creative with the bra and panties second chance thing... though i bet maria was thinkin "second chance, where was my first chance" ---Paulley

It was rumoured that a diva from SmackDown! would face a diva from RAW, since there isn't an eighth diva on RAW. Levodevo 02:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another rumor going around was that Beth Phoenix was returning since she had been fully recovered since the summer, and was already on the RAW roster. Also, after the quarter-finals had passed, I read on a couple wrestling news sites that Moolah was going to be the 8th participant, vs. Melina, but didn't want to job. 69.140.12.149 21:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woman's Championship

Should it be noted that, even though it is an incorrect term, the Women's championship is often referred to as the Woman's Championship? The Unknowledgeable Genius 22:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT???? 76.110.82.251 00:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't make sense, would it, Levodevo? Johnluisocasio (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fabulous' Moolah's reign/s.

It shows on Wikipedia's article on the list of the Women's Championship's Title's reigns, it shows that the Fabulous Moolah, is technically an 8-time Women's Champion. Is this an error, or else why is it accepted that Trish is the women's wrestler with the most title reigns?Rev. James Triggs 01:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WWE doesnt recognise that Moolah lost the title to some japanese wrestlers —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paulley (talk • contribs) 10:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I see. Thanks for clearing that up.Rev. James Triggs 19:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

On the subject of if a Smackdown diva won the title, once she wins, she goes to RAW.

It's just like when Gregory Helms won the Cruiserweight title and moved to Smackdown. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vlh (talk • contribs) 00:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

No, that's not necessarily correct. The situation has never arisen, and the WWE has never stated anything about it. So, technically, your statement is incorrect. The Unknowledgeable Genius 22:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Ashley is challenging for the title, assuming she wins, this should all be cleared up. The Unknowledgeable Genius 22:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Woman's Division

Shouldn't the info of the women's division go on the Diva Section? not on the championship section? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gustavo Masis-Flores (talk • contribs) 23:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

High/Low Point?

I would concider Mickie James' feud with Trish to be a high point of the division that year, it was a major point of discussion, and I dare say a big draw for WM that year. The low point came after WM, when WWE apparently let go of Mickie's "Psycho" Gimick. Sephiroth storm 05:15, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wait

Why can't people wait until it is official to report it? And, what is the point of putting Mickie James down when she reportedly lost it minutes later? -- Scorpion 05:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? The match doesn't take place until Sunday. How can she have won the title and lost it when the match hasn't happened yet! Anakinjmt 05:29, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It happened at a house show. It is official: house show reports aren't just made up things. The only thing that might be needed for it: a note saying WWE didn't recognize it (if that's the case). House show title changes are just fine for the article. RobJ1981 05:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WWE doesnt seem to be recognizing Mickie James' winning the title. On WWE.com, the match is not mentioned, Melina is still listed as being in her first reign, and Mickie James has had only two reigns. I would recommend setting it up like its done for the NWA Heavyweight Title (with Ric Flair's four unrecognized reigns) and the WWE Title (with the interruptions to Backlund's first reign), and putting James' third title in as unrecognized, and listing Melina as having only one official reign, until such time as WWE recognizes it.

WWE.com recognized the title change under their Title History section, so I guess its official.

Wow, I'm genuinely surprised WWE bothered to recognize the reign. I seem to recall a similar incident occurring either in 2001 or 2002 when Chris Jericho accidentally forgot to kick out of a pin attempt by The Rock in a WWF Undisputed Championship match. The Rock was announced as the champion, but then Shane McMahon ordered an immediate rematch that saw Jericho win back the title. The WWF never bothered to acknowledge the incident took place. (I believe it was an event in South Korea, but I might be wrong on that.) Jeff Silvers 19:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other Reigns

I edited the number of women who held the Hardcore Championship, Bobcat and Teri also held the title. Sephiroth storm 03:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But they never held THIS championship -- Scorpion 03:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

STOP ERASING THINGS!!!!!

I added in the traivia section that Melina was the first female contestant of tough enough to win the title, and someone else added Candice was the first diva search contestant to win the title, and the picture of Candice is gone!!! STOP ERASING THINGS!!

Stop adding trivia to the article. And the image was deleted. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the image deleted? It was a good one!!! Bring it back and quit taking control!!!! Why have a Trivia section with one thing in it!! STUPID!!!!!!

Amen! Some of these guys think they are in charge and the keepers to all wrestling info on wiki. Get a life and leave people's stuff alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.191.100.10 (talk) 18:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, let people contribute to the article unless it is trolling or something irelevant.65.94.220.217 (talk) 05:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:TRIVIA. The image was likely deleted because it was a copyright violation. No one thinks they are in charge. We simply follow Wikipedia policy. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 14:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

Could someone reference the article, please?????????????????????

Fair use rationale for Image:Womens championship.jpg

Image:Womens championship.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 01:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No Divas or Women's Championship

On the WWE website, there are no longer any profiles of WWE Divas or the Women's Championship, seems a bit strange any ideas why? Masterofdestiny 04:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed at WP:PW, and we don't know for sure. The most common theory is that WWE is planning to redesing the pages like they did for the main site. TJ Spyke 06:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah there is! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.202.37.142 (talk) 23:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This conversation was months old. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:06, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers

Please do not add spoilers from the RAW tapings in London, England. The show has been taped but hasn't aired anywhere yet. Michaelclarkc (talk) 23:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWE Divas Championship?

Shouldn't there be a page for the WWE Divas Championship? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WOWitude (talk • contribs) 02:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The last time a new championship was supposedly announced before the draft, it's existence turned out to be unnecessary (SmackDown! Championship in 2005). We should wait until at least an actual belt is seen or presented, much in the same way the TNA Knockout's title was treated. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 02:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this page atleast be split from Redirecting from WWE Diva's Championship for when its crowned? Overlordneo (talk) 03:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If or when an actual champion is crowned, the page will be split. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 04:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a possibility that it will be a placeholder title, and the belts get unified, possibly by SummerSlam, so I wouldn't expect a Divas Championship page to be up for too long. Steveweiser (talk) 11:32, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of the Smackdown! Championship in 2005 ended up getting changed because at the time the World Heavyweight Championship (at the time held by Batista) and WWE Championship (at the time held by John Cena) were both on Raw due to the fact that Cena was the 1st person drafted from Smackdown to Raw but then Batista ended up as the last person drafted and he went to Smackdown therefore making the Smackdown Championship pointless. So my point is that, that isn't the case with the new Diva's Championship because it will be contested between the Smackdown/ECW diva's and will be entirely separate from Raw. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.233.105 (talk) 01:51, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The point is understood however the circumstances from 2005 and today remain the same. A tournament was announced for a new championship before the draft ended in 2005 (in this case before it starts). The winner ended up not being presented the title when a champion was drafted from another brand with his title to take the created title's place. Because we are so close to the draft, anything can happen. Still due to the severity of the lack of information presently available about this new title, an article cannot be justified. A note of the mention that was made about the new diva's title is acceptable though.^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 01:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a point here - people keep assuming it will be contested on ECW - well as I understand it, ECW will now be recorded before RAW, so the talent exchange will certainly end and one presumes a new one with RAW will begin. I agree that until we see a tangible belt around a Divas waist, hold off creating the article.87.127.178.28 (talk) 11:21, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the taping of the 7/4 Smackdown they showed the new Diva's Championship belt. So a page needs to be made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.163.182 (talk) 22:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Umm has it ever occurred to you that today is 7/3?SRX^--^Latino Heat 22:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that, but both contenders for the belt are known and a nice, bug pic of the belt has been released.

As I recall, the Smackdown Belt was never revealed, and the belt that was held by Teddy could have been cardboard or a faux title. We actually get to see this title. I think WWE wouldn't waste their time making it if it wasn't going to be used. King Shuckle (talk) 14:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is dumbass! Matrix8110 (talk) 02:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

Seeing as the belt is slightly obscured in this photo and not the focus of attention, I was wondering why the one of Debra sitting at a table with Owen and Bossman cropped wasn't used? Or the picture with Candice, for E instead of F, where you can see the whole thing. Tony2Times (talk) 17:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would surmise becuase the photo of Debra is the old belt, a past design if you will, and the current one is the current design. Also, if you are referring to the image on Candice Michelle in the "2006-2007" section, I would say because you can't really see any details on the belt due to light reflecting off it. The one we have in my opinion, is currently the best, unless someone can take a photo of their replica belt or something. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 13:45, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

reigns

can somebody please add a reigns section?! Matrix8110 (talk) 02:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thre's a separate page for it. List of WWE Women's Champions, or there's List of WWE Women's Championship reigns by length. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 14:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]