Talk:WWE

About the argument concerning the WWE/World Tag Team Championship & Unified WWE Tag Team Championship...

After Chris Jericho won both the (WCW) World Heavyweight Championship & WWE Championship, he became the first WWE Undisputed Champion, even though he still carried both belts. Even though both belts weren't considered retired, they were considered ONE championship from that point on, until they were split up into the World Heavyweight & WWE Championships we have now. The current situation with the WWE Tag Team Championship & World Tag Team Championship is the same. The Colons are considered the Unified WWE Tag Team Champions, even though they still carry both sets of tag titles. Even though both sets aren't retired, they are considered ONE championship, the Unified WWE Tag Team Championship. So there, WWE has set a precedent for how their championships are viewed. If you're still unsure of what to do, then hold a poll and ask what should be done with the tag titles. 24.12.89.226 (talk) 02:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

First you are incorrect. The WWF and WCW Titles were unified yes. But they were never broken up. The World Heavyweight Championship is not the WCW Championship. It is an entirely new championship. It just has the big gold belt design, which has been used by multiple championships. For now, they just hold both belts, which means neither are retired yet. So for now, we should continue with both on the page until one disappears or a new championship is debuted.--WillC 02:50, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, like Will stated. The current World Heavyweight Championship (WWE) is not the same title as the WCW World Heavyweight Championship. Until one of the WWE Tag Team Championships is retired officially by WWE, which we would know by now because of WWE.com's title histories, then we will denote it as such but for now WWE.com has both titles still active.--Truco ₅₀₃ 03:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Will is right. Besides the two titles became one after the creation of the WWE Udisputed title.Sid 4x (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Allow me to explain this better

First and foremost on the Jericho point, yes Chris Jericho won the WCW Championship and then went on to win the WWE Championship. Following this, the WCW Championship was unified with the WWE Championship. However, with unification matches, the result of the match can spawn two different outcomes. One outcome results in one of the championships being decommissioned with the champion choosing to hold a single championship (...as was the case with the WCW U.S. and WWE IC unification match at Survivor Series 2001, where Edge chose the IC championship.) The second outcome results in the champion choosing to hold both championships (...as was the case with the WCW Cruiserweight and WWF Lightheavyweight unification match on July 30, 2001, where Xpac continued to defend the two titles both simultaneously and separately.)

With the Undisputed Championship, the WCW Championship was decommissioned and since it hasn't been reactivated, in theory, it is still merged with the WWE Championship. WWE Undisputed Championship wasn't "split" to create the World Heavyweight Championship. Unless the WWE Undisputed Championship was split back into the WCW Championship and WWE Championship, the WWE Undisputed Championship wasn't split. The World Heavyweight Championship spun-off from the WWE Undisputed Championship just as the WWE, ECW, and WCW Championships spun-off from the NWA Championship. It is for this reason that the World Heavyweight Championship is connected and related to the WCW, WWE, and NWA Championships; because it was created from the WWE Championship, which contains the WCW Championship, which was created from the NWA Championship.

So with the WCW Championship decommissioned and still merged with the WWE Championship, it is obvious that the first outcome from the two listed above took place. Now with The Colóns and the situation with Unified Tag Team Championships, it is unfortunately still too early to tell which of the two outcomes listed above will take place. As both title histories on WWE.com still list The Colóns as current champions for both the World Tag Team and WWE Tag Team Championhip without making use of the words "Final Champions" on either page, there is no evidence pointing towards either of the two possible outcomes. It is too early to tell which of the two championships will be decommissioned or whether both titles will continue to be active. It is for that reason that nothing has been done about the Unified Tag Team Championships on the subject's related articles.^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 03:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Kind of reminds me of the J-Crown: championships that were still active in one way or another, but unified with a different name. 69.226.236.202 (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2009 (UTC)Rolmo

Cost Cutting

Under the cost cutting header, there is a claim that there were several wrestlers who were let go by the company. Which wrestlers were let go exactly? --Reverend Edward Brain, D.D. (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The note was added in January of this year. The portion of the note regarding the release of talent is not cited by any reliable source and has therefore been removed. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 21:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

ICP

why isnt the Insane Clown Posse mentioned in this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.149.183.41 (talk) 05:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Why would they be? They didn't have any significant role in the company. They made a few appearances with The Oddities and thats it. The Oddities have their own article and they are covered there. TJ Spyke 05:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Other Accomplishment Addition

Should we add "Miss Wrestle Mania" to the other Accomplishments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.215.203 (talk) 18:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

No. Non notable trivia for this article. !! Justa Punk !! 01:32, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Na. Just a onetime thing. itll probably be retired or something :p <small>FUN WIT AHMED, DUDEZ</small>_{[[user talk:Fun with ahmed|TALK]]} (talk) 21:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

They haven't even mentioned it since Santino defeated Vickie back at Extreme Rules. TJ Spyke 21:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

They should treat it like it never existed TBH. But we'll wait and see if they do it again at the next Wrestlemania. Podgy Stuffn (talk) 03:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that the montreal screwjob and the dx takeover of wcw should both have a major part on here sense they were both big parts in wwe history and are very important turning points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshawthorne (talk • contribs) 18:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

What does that have to do with this section? TJ Spyke 20:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The DX takeover was a big part of history because that was really the beginning of the downfall of the wcw, which lead to it being purcased by the wwe, which was a major accomplishment by DX. And the Montreal Screjob was more of a turning point but it still was an accomplishment in Triple H's career. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.244.3.66 (talk) 18:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Besides the fact that neither are accomplishments, Triple H's role in the Montreal Screwjob was minimal. All he did was support the idea, he wasn't involved in the actual screwjob. TJ Spyke 20:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hell, DX didn't do shit to kill WCW. If anything, AOL killed WCW. Neither one you mentioned is any type of accomplishment, plus no source to back them up either.--WillC 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I meant to say Shawn Michaels not Triple H. But even if they arent included in accomplishments, because i realize they are not this type of accomplishment, they should have their own thing under this page. The DX takeover was the first time either brand had recognized the other any time, they never even mentioned the other existed on the show. WWF was falling to WCW because all the stars were leaving for it and they needed to get some viewers. Just read the DX biography, it mentions both. At least one of the two should be mentioned. If you mention the acquisition of the WCW you should at least say something about the beggining of the downfall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dshawthorne (talk • contribs) 18:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

First time? No it wasn't. WCW on their very first episode of Nitro (Labor Day 1995) talked about WWF when Lex Luger (who had just appeared on WWF the previous week) showed up. Reigning WWF Women's Champion threw the actual WWF Women's Championship belt into a trash can live on Nitro, every other week Eric Bischoff would give away the spoilers for Raw (since Raw used to be live one week, then they would tape the next weeks episode on Tuesday. So Bischoff would give away th results for the taped episodes). Suffice it to say that WCW had mentioned WWF on many occasions before the DX Army angle. TJ Spyke 21:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

i meant to say the first time that the WWE had decided to mention it. The wwe had even made RAW is WAR and went to war with the WCW in april and may. On april 27th of 1998, when both were in Virginia, DX went to the arena and were insulting the WCW to the fans and saying they give out free tickets to fill up seats for tv. They even tried to enter the arena in heir jeep. Another show of RAW is WAR showed Triple HHH flying over the WCW headquarters in a plaine with skywrite saying wcw sucks, and DX says suck it. This was realy the beginning of the takeover, after a rough time for the wwe. Especially after one of their biggest superstars, Shawn Michaels, went out with a back injury. I dont see why this cant have its part in this or even create a new tab with the downfall of WCW and big events between the two companies leading up to the purchase of the WCW by the WWE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.244.3.66 (talk) 18:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Storylines

Why are the actors' parts outlined from the perspective of a general WWE fan's suspension of disbelief? The ups and downs of the Trish Stratus' "wrestling career" is told as if she were in fact a professional athlete. I chose her at random, of course - it appears a policy decision has been made to portray the characters in this manner. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.56.211.96 (talk) 19:31, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Because that is how an encyclopedia like this would record it. !! Justa Punk !! 05:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

PG Era

Should The PG Era Be Mentioned? (which sucks I may add) this in cludes the WWE Kids and Bringing the rating down from TV-14 to PG.KingRaven (>$.$)> (talk) 00:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Bit out of date

Bit out of date--Awiki90 (talk) 07:11, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

How so?^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 07:12, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

411, others, report that Shane McMahon has left WWE

I attempted to make the edit, but got a "blocked link" message in response. Shane McMahon resigned last week, with a letter to the fans on the WWE site and a lot of coverage in wrestling media.

"It is with great sadness that I announce my resignation from the WWE, effective January 1, 2010.

I have never even considered a future outside the walls of the WWE. However, sometimes life takes an unexpected turn and while it is the most difficult decision I have ever made, it is time for me to move on.

First and foremost, I would like to thank my father for the incredible education working with him has provided and for giving me the opportunity to play a role in building WWE into the global phenomenon that it is today. I am extremely proud to have been the 4th generation in this business, and I am grateful for everyday I was able to work along side not only my own, but the entire WWE family.

Thank you to all of the WWE Superstars both past and present for your passion, pride and dedication. You are truly the engine of the organization and it has been a pleasure to work with, learn from and get to know all of you. Thank you for the privilege of sharing the stage with you and for allowing me to become but a momentary member of your elite brotherhood. I have so much appreciation for the many sacrifices you endure, both physically and personally, to make this business the success that it is. The respect I have for each of you is immeasurable.

Finally, there are no words to express my gratitude to WWE fans the world over for supporting this company through good times and bad and for your unbridled passion that fuels the Superstars' performances. I am profoundly grateful to have been able to entertain you both in front of the camera and from behind the scenes. You are the greatest fans in the world.

I will always love this business and will remain a fan forever.

Shane"214.3.138.234 (talk) 19:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Steve

And? What exactly did you want to add? He is still with the company, he won't leave until January (and even then he will still be a large shareholder). He is still with WWE right now and still in his position and will continue to do it for about 2 more months. 19:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

He's now left (Jan 1st), and I can't recall my log-in details, so can someone remove Shane from the "Key figures" list?86.134.129.236 (talk) 22:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Divas champion

Jillian is not the divas champion, the current champion is Melina. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maht0701 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Which is what the article says, why bring this up? TJ Spyke 01:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

i think he might have read the table wrong but im just guessing Mattspac^talk 03:41, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Well Jillian WAS Divas Champion, for about 2 minutes (lol). Dwibley (talk —Preceding undated comment added 15:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC).

Yeah, what was odd though is that Maht made the comment 3 weeks after Melina won it. TJ Spyke 15:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Linda McMahon No Longer on the Board of Directors

In November of 2009, Linda McMahon resigned from the Board of Directors all together. She resigned in September as the CEO. She should be removed from the list of people on the Board of Directors

Source: http://www.sescoops.com/wwe-news/linda-mcmahon-gone-from-wwe-campaign-spending —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenttowsley (talk • contribs) 22:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Copyright

To whoever tagged this article with the copyright concern, where is the problem material? !! Justa Punk !! 09:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, somebody needs to provide an explanation here or else the tag should be removed. Jeff Silvers (talk) 02:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

WWE Championship

The belt is a RAW brand and RAW owned belt, therefore, it should be placed as such. The article about the belt says it is a RAW belt. The note is enough to say that a current SmackDown superstar holds it, but Raw owns the belt. –Turian (talk) 19:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you might want to check wwe.com (which has it listed under BOTH brands). Also, WWE owns the belt (not any particular brand). TJ Spyke 19:56, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

It is a Raw belt, whether you like it or not. –Turian (talk) 19:57, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

But it's a SD title too, whether YOU like it or not.--Yugiohmike2001 (talk) 20:03, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Exaclty. Turian, you might want to do at least SOME research before spouting false claims. WWE itself considers the title part of BOTH brands. I came up with a neutral compromise, but Turian refuses to accept it (and demanded I revert myself). TJ Spyke 20:05, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks like we have a user who needs to review WP:POV before editing. As well as possibly a mark. !! Justa Punk !! 08:13, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

You could also mention the WWE Draft in 2008 that sent Triple H to Smackdown with the WWE Campionship —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hulkamania007 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Dual-Branded color

I think the color for the Dual-Branded(Unified Tag Team Championship) section should be purple, since they appear on both Raw(which is the Red brand) and SmackDown(which is the Blue brand). I know the purple will remind people of ECW, but since it's not being used now, why not use it for the Dual-Branded section. Anybody disagree?--Yugiohmike2001 (talk) 17:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the color is just fine there's nothing wrong with it being lite blue--Steam Iron 17:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't you mean green? SD's lite blue.--Yugiohmike2001 (talk) 18:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

In my browser its lite blue.--Steam Iron 01:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I see now. Ok.--Yugiohmike2001 (talk) 01:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Entertainment/Post-Attitude Era

Why isn't the Entertainment or Post-Attitude(as WWE calls it) era not apart of this Article? it was an important era that started when The Attitude Era ended.--Rmisdice2 (talk) 04:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)--Rmisdice2 (talk) 04:27, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Because it's its present. The Attitude Era itself wasn't talked about until after it concluded. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 04:56, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

No its past we are currently in the PARENT GUIDEANCE ERA aka PG ERA