Talk:Triple Crown (professional wrestling)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Triple Crown (professional wrestling) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Professional wrestling Start‑class Low‑importance

	Triple Crown (professional wrestling) 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 February 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

The OVW Triple Crown

SilentRage decided to blank the OVW section, stating "OVW is irrellivant". I applaud him for being bold but I do't feel that blanking a section without discussion is constructive and if there is one thing the TCC talk page is renowned for it's long discussions. I would rather not have to keep reverting so I will state what I think. I have never seen any OVW wrestling, but I know that it breeds a good deal of the current WWE roster, so if OVW by itself is notable and we have pages for all three titles then a table to inform those who have an interest of who has won the three titles should be kept. Maybe it should be moved from the TCC page to the OVW page. But if SilentRage feels that OVW is "irrellivant" then maybe he should find some sources to improve its "rellivance". I slapped an OR tag on it before the AfD debate but that was a flag for others to find sources, not an invite to blank the section. Darrenhusted 14:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simply put, OVW isn't a major promotion. If we put OVW, then we'll have to put DSW, and a bunch of other mid-level federations. The list would be way too long. I actually would like to question you on why you would actually think that OVW is on the level of national promotions like WWE or TNA and why you think it is greater than, let's say, DSW or ROH. In fact, I think there was already a discussion and consensus on leaving-out the non-major promotions off the list. Check the archives. ^---SilentRAGE! 17:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page says Triple Crown, but is it really.

Hi! everyone. Okay I have a question why does the page say Triple Crown when we only accept WWE and TNA triple Crown records? Why not ECW, WCW, or OVW? What about indy promotions? We need to change the page to include everything. Not just TNA and WWE. If we don't change the page then change the name. It says Triple Crown and it should say TNA and WWE Triple Crown Championship. Or Triple Crown Championship in Major Professional Wrestling.--WillC 07:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It did have OVW and WCW listed, but they were unreferenced. I moved the OVW to the OVW page. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was just at the OVW page. Where did it go?--WillC 08:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, check the history. It was there, but as it has no refs it could have been removed, it has been a year or so since I moved it. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you but I just don't understand how come certain stuff gets taken down but I've seen other stuff with no source at all be kept than something that is easier to believe.--WillC 19:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with your logic is that it is, well, logic :P. When dealing with human beings, the logical course of action is usually the course that isn't taken. Don't try to understand it; if something seems stupid at first glance it probably is. Cheers, The Hybrid 03:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I didn't even understand what you meant. Whatever. But why don't we add the OVW and ECW Triple Crowns to the page as well. It is the Triple Crown Championship page and there is more Triple Crowns than the WWE and TNA Crowns.--WillC 06:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because there are no sources. Just because other stuff without sources is kept doesn't mean we have to keep this. Other mistakes don't justify more. Cheers, The Hybrid 07:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay if I can find a source for the OVW and ECW Triple Crowns can I add them then?--WillC 07:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's reliable, yes. Cheers, The Hybrid 17:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay.--WillC 19:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Triple Crowns

The lead states that there is a Multiple Triple Crown. If so, why aren't the multiple triple crown winners in WWE listed? Chris Jericho, The Rock, Steve Austin and Bret Hart are each 2-time Triple Crown winners, Shawn Michaels is a 3-time Triple Crown winner and Edge is an astounding 5-time Triple Crown winner. I think they should be listed. Alex ^T/_C Guest Book 14:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That only applies to TNA. Tenay and West often make reference to Styles being a "three time Triple Crown Champion." WWE never makes any such mention. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 14:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but WWE never makes any mention that the Triple Crown even exists. So, I think that argument isn't really consistent with the rest of the article. Because, apparently, I thought that the Triple Crown championship was something invented by the fans. But, if it's something WWE invented, and they don't mention it anymore, then I think that the last Triple Crown champion mentioned on TV is in fact the last triple crown champion. Who was this? Alex ^T/_C Guest Book 19:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWE.com occasionally mentions the Triple Crown. It's sourced in the article, check the links. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only source from WWE is that Pedro Morales is a Triple Crown Champion. Basically, there is absoulutely no other source. I challenge this as WP:OR. Alex ^T/_C Guest Book 19:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US Championship title?

Isn't the US Championship equal in level to the Intercontinental Championship? By extension couldn't it be held as a proxy for the Intercontinental Championship, much like the WHC and the WWE titles?

Long answer: This has been discussed before. It assumed that they are of equal level, but doing so is original research which is not permitted on Wikipedia. WWE.com has pages that confirm WWE tag titles and WHC as proxies for the World tag and WWE titles, but so for the US title. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer: No. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't matt hardy close to a triple crown or is he a triple crown because he was the tag team champion ( world and wwe) The Usa title and the Ecw championship

signed turtle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.72.38.16 (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, a former Tag champion needs an IC and World/WWE title reign. Matt has neither. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely don't consider the ECW Title a surrogate for the World Heavyweight or the WWE championships, especially since PWI and other organizations don't recognize it as a world title anymore. The US Championship SHOULD substitute the Intercontinental Title, but until we get clear confirmation, we can't say that it does. So Matt with the PRESENT state of the Triple Crown must have an Intercontinental Title and WWE/World Heavyweight title reign. So in short, I agree with Darren. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.151.84.17 (talk) 16:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think i understand why the US title and ECW title are not included. This is because the ECW title of course was from ECW and brought over by the WWE , the same with the US title from WCW. All the other titles are founded and the history began with WWE. -- Sion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.209.101 (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't see why. Gavyn Sykes seems to think that although there is reason to believe that including the US title would be "original research" but isn't this whole article more or less original research? It's never been officially acknowledged by WWE. There is no official answer. Dahumorist (talk) 06:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWE did on Raw, Edge stated it on tv that it is real. Plus WWE says Grandslam and Triple Crown in their articles all the time.Will C 06:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ECW World Title is considered a World Title by the WWE and by Sections of the NWA so should it not be considered a World Title. Further more it is defended around the World on house shows and TV Tapings around the World so without doubt it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawisrob2 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The ECW Title has no world status. Because a championship is called a world title does not mean it is a world title. WWE nor the NWA give World status. You can call the OVW Championship a world title but it is not.--WillC 01:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the ECW Title is not on the same level as the WWE Championship or the World Heavyweight Championship, then why do the winners of the Royal Rumble get to choose between the three titles? Prior to WrestleMania 23, all 3 champions stood in the ring on RAW and Undertaker had to make his decision as to who to challenge at WrestleMania. On WWE.com, you can find this exact paragraph in the Royal Rumble 2008 results page (www.wwe.com/shows/royalrumble/history/2008/matches/5267610321112/results/) "Cena will be looking to capture some gold in the Sunshine State at WrestleMania XXIV … but which champion will he choose to face? Will he go after the WWE Championship – currently held by Randy Orton – and look to regain the title he never lost in the ring from a man who never beat him for it? Or will Cena look to conquer a different mountain and challenge an old foe, World Heavyweight Champion Edge, or a new kingpin, ECW Champion Chavo Guerrero, for a title he has never worn?" Based on both, it is clear that the WWE now recognizes the ECW Title as an equal belt along the lines of the WWE Championship and World Heavyweight Championship, and thus, it should be on this page as part of the Triple Crown Championship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvibe222 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't about the equality of the ECW Championship though. While it is true that the winner of the Royal Rumble and Money in the Bank ladder match are awarded a world title match, which includes the ECW Championship, WWE has yet to declare that the ECW Championship or the United States Championship also compose part of the Triple Crown or Grand Slam Champion status. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 04:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And where is it sourced on here that the WWE specifically came out and stated that the World Heavyweight Championship and the WWE Tag Team Championships can compose part of the Triple Crown? Since those aren't sourced, someone obviously assumed they were equal to the WWE Championship and World Tag Team Championships, and decided to put them on here as part of the Triple Crown. Jvibe222 (talk) 04:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But what would make it a world title. Title defences in Japan or Mexico would wouldn't it?-Rawisrob2 December 28, 2008 1159 a.m. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawisrob2 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it, whenever WWE recognizes that the United States Championship or the ECW Championship are or were eligible for a triple crown championship, then it will be known. Speculation on what makes it a world title or any kind will not be inserted into the article. — Moe ε 20:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Potential Champions?

What is the point of the Potential Champions section? And if it actually has one [which I doubt], why shouldn't the non-contracted talent be placed? Owen Hart [who's dead], BG James, Val Venis, Ken Shamrock, Test, Lance Storm, Kip James, Rikishi, The Godfather, Roddy Piper, The Mountie, Jeff Jarrett, Marty Jannetty, Davey Boy Smith [also dead], Greg Valentine, Tito Santana and Christian [likely contracted to WWE] also fit the requirements of being "Potential Triple Crowns" even if they aren't contracted.

Potentiality is relative. You're not entitled to "potentially" do something if you just can't do it. (You can't win a title if you don't work for the company.) As to the point of the section: no clue. ^---SilentRAGE! 22:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]