The remaining names on the list are not linked, I could not find much information on them in general, the only notable thing seems to be winning this title and no other titles. I left them unliked as I don't think it's realistic that anyone could find enough information to establish much in the way of notability. It follows the pattern and format of all the other wrestling championship lists I've brought to FL status.
Support: Meets to me.--WillC 06:40, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Resolved comments from Wrestlinglover
Give review tomorrow hopefully. At the moment, it seems fine from just skiming it, but never know.--WillC 06:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
"The Mexican National Welterweight Championship (Campeonato Nacional Peso Welter in Spanish) is a Mexican professional wrestling championship" → "The Mexican National Welterweight Championship (Campeonato Nacional Peso Welter in Spanish) is a Mexican professional wrestling welterweight championship" To be clear and match articles of this nature.
It's pretty clear already, I mean the weightclass is already in the name, saying the welterweight championship is a welterweight championship is redundant IMO. MPJ-DK (36,6% Done) Talk 07:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Well this is the introduction. It is like world heavyweight championships. We state they are whcs after we give the name still.--WillC 03:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
I've never used that introduction and most of my FLs have not been for heavyweight titles. MPJ-DK (36,6% Done) Talk 06:08, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
I know, but to show how things have usually been done. Thought it was best to follow the usual format.--WillC 20:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
"The usual format" is one that's not actually applied to 90% of the titles with actual weight limits, so I respectfully disagree that it's "how this have usually been done" and the fact that it's redundant and IMO poor writing. MPJ-DK (36,6% Done) Talk 06:43, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Okay, just thought it was better to keep consistent between championship articles. But that isn't a must. Fine.--WillC 07:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
"(EMLL; later renamed Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre, CMLL)" → "(EMLL; later renamed CMLL)" Mentioned earlier, don't see a reason to repeat.
Good catch, I chose to have the long spelled out name though and removed the abbriviation as that was established earlier. MPJ-DK (36,6% Done) Talk 07:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Fine, but having the notes in the notes section be full sentences would be nice.
Reigns by combined length
Will assume everything is in order since this isn't your first go around.
I see some say between 1 day and, etc. You know, I would change it to between 0 days, etc. Maining because it is possible they could have lost the same day they lost it. Just a thought, that is what I've been doing with List of WCW World Television Champions in a subpage.
0 or 1 are both assumptions with 1 being much more likely in Mexican wrestling, It's never been commented before so maybe opening this issue up to other reviwers? Wether reigns with an unknown length should be listed as between 0 days and "end" or 1 day and "end". MPJ-DK (36,6% Done) Talk 07:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Well if you look at this subpage of my work, you'll hopefully see the reason I think it should be the other way.--WillC 03:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
For the Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre promotion in the infobox: "–1992"; why is there no year before the dash?
Because I have found no documentation when CMLL became the sole promoter, it was between the mid-1930s and the 1960s but I have not found anything more definite than that. MPJ-DK (40,4% Done) Talk 11:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
"Comisión de Box y Lucha Libre Mexico D.F." Why in quotation marks?
Well, I don't think it should be in italics either. You're not mentioning a word, and even though it is in a foreign language, it is a proper noun, so italics aren't necessary to denote it as a foreign word. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
"titles still promoted today and older" "today" is redundant.
"but as Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre (EMLL; later renamed Consejo Mundial de Lucha Libre) grew to dominance it" Sounds strange. How about "but as Empressa Mexicana de Lucha Libre ... became dominant, it"
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Ref 3, what does "pp. all" mean?Dabomb87 (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
It means the entire book is the source. The claim is that it's one of the oldest still existing titles, the book is the collective title history going back to the turn of the last century and it proves that there are only 2 or 3 titles as old as this one still around (and they're all "Mexican National" titles) I changed the "All" to the page range of the actual title history in the book. MPJ-DK (40,4% Done) Talk 11:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
"Being a professional wrestling championship, it is not won legitimately; it is instead won via a scripted ending to a match or awarded to a wrestler because of a storyline. The official definition of the welterweight weight class in Mexico is between 77 kg (170 lb) and 87 kg (190 lb), but is not always strictly enforced.[Note 2] Because Lucha Libre emphasizes the lower weight classes, this division is considered more important than the normally more prestigious heavyweight division of a promotion." - reads odd way round for me. I'd keep defining the competition before you state how it's won. So, simply put, I'd move the "Being a professional..." sentence to end of that para.
I have not linked names where I could not find any information other than the fact that they held this title, I deemed that they were not notable and left them unlinked. MPJ-DK (40,4% Done) Talk 00:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
"a belt with an 87 kg (190 lb) upper limit, despite weighing 90 kg (200 lb)" - whose conversion is this? 3kg does not equate to 10lb...