Misplaced Pages

Talk:Big Gold Belt: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:40, 17 March 2009 edit173.109.60.92 (talk) →Ownership of the belt (Early 1990's WWF "Real World's Champion" angle: added signature← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:39, 24 January 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,013,098 edits Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(36 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{pro-wrestling|class=Start|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
{{WikiProject Professional wrestling|importance=High}}
}}


==Edit== ==Actual Debut==
⚫ The actual debut wasn't a February 22 episode of World Championship Wrestling. It actually debuted on a February 14, 1986 Florida show called Battle of The Belts II where Ric Flair defended the NWA World Title against Barry Windham. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:54, 7 March 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
--I edited the text of this page, seeing as though the belt in question (or the WWE alternative) is actually defended on Smackdown, as opposed to Raw.


== Proposed Move ==
] 01:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
{{discussion top}}
:Closed as '''no consensus to move'''.
From ] to ]..... ] (]) 07:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' from me seeing as this isn't a Championship its a Belt.--]] 10:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. This article is ''not'' about a championship. This article is about the belt, which has represented multiple championships. ] ] 16:43, 10 March 2011(UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per above comments. The article is about the belt that has represented multiple championships. It isn't an actual championship itself.<sup>--]]--</sup> 22:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
*'''Support'''. WWE owns the Big Gold thing, its history, its heritage, and its definition. if WWE dislikes the term "belt", we should reflect this. ] (]) 07:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
:Its a belt not a Championship. The belt it self has represented many championship but has never be a Championship in itself.--]] 07:50, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
::But under current WWE terminology the word "belt" has been replaced by "championship:. And the belt/championship/whatever is owned by WWE, adn that's how they refer to it. ] (]) 07:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
:::Still this is a Belt not a championship and it doesnt matter what wwe calls it they have no say here.--]] 08:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
::::While you're right Dcheagle, its not even about that. What it ultimately comes down to is that this is not the WWE encyclopedia. We are not WWE centric as we try to maintain a ]. An example of this is that while WWE removes all references pertaining to the WWF trademark, we do not. Thus there was never a valid point to NXT Fan's or WCW Fan 2000's argument - two accounts that are clearly operated by a single user.<sup>--]]--</sup> 02:13, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
{{discussion bottom}}


== Ric Flair == ==WWE history claims==
WWE claims they own the history of the Big Gold Belt? That's hilarious. They may own all the video tape history and they own WCW which the belt used to represent, but for 7 1/2 years it represented the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. WWE does not own that. ] 10:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
:No, they (correctly) claim they own the copyright and trademark to the design (which was owned by Crockett, and WCW as their successor, not the NWA) and the WCW title history since 1991. And there's an easier way to sign posts that won't trigger an unsigned post bot: sign with four tildes at the end (these things ~) ] (]) 14:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
::They actually don't own the copyright and/or trademark to the actual original design. The reason they added the WWE logo to the main plate in 2003 was so that they could copyright that particular design of the belt.<sup>--]]--</sup> 18:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
:::Actually, I think you may be right. Now that you mention it, I remember reading that part of the reason for the changed designs of the then WWF Championship and IC title belts during the Attitude Era was that the previous designs weren't trademarked or copyrighted and many independents (including the early ECW) were using substantially similar designs (such as the ECW TV title when RVD first won it). That said, the point that the WWE ''does'' own the WCW title lineage is correct. ] (]) 19:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)


⚫ == nWo ==
Not sure if it means much, but Ric Flair said in a episode of ] that the belt that WWE has is in fact the original and is not a replica. <sup>---]</sup>] 15:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


The original plan was to have the nWo as a second promotion that would run nWo Nitro while WCW ran Thunder, similar to WWE having RAW ECW & Smackdown as seperate shows with their own titles & roster. Now this never happened, but shouldnt some mention be made to the nWo branding the title with their letters? Even the WCW World Title history should make mention of that occurring.
:I remember that as well. Don't really have the sources to back it up, so I can't put it in the article, but from my understanding, the original Big Gold belt, which has been repaired a few times, is in WWE headquarters in CT.
] (]) 01:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
:The one Hogan kept after Bash at the Beach 2000 was the copy made for "Ready to Rumble," which they had gold plated in order to have a spare. This was done after they actually couldn't find the original belt for an hour backstage once, and realized a spare might be a good idea.
:Flair also has a copy, but his is slightly different, as its the one from the "real world's title" angle. It is the one that was digitally blurred on TV, but to live audiences looks pretty close. It's on Reggie parks belt site . It can also bee seen in the photograph section of Flair's book.
:And there's the current version, used on SmackDown!, which has the WWE logo on it.
:If anyone can dig up better, more complete sources than my memory, then I'd love to see this in the article. I'll work on it myself, as well, of course. ] 16:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
I know the original belt had the top portion of the main plate bent slightly forward. I dont know if this was repaired or not, but the belt currently held by Batista is definitely not the original.] 17:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
:Yeah, Jarret was champion at the time. That might have been the night they couldn't find it for an hour. It was fixed.
:The current is definitely a copy, as the WWE logo is pretty easily seen. ] 06:13, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


I have just modified one external link on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
w2x Is also currently using a similar belt 2 this Casey Springate opened w2x on December,5,2005 had ome different belt 4 a lil while then on December,18,2006 the new belt entered and began more info about the w2x and this title will be around
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080215113326/http://www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/wcwchampionship/3044541104 to http://www.wwe.com/inside/titlehistory/wcwchampionship/3044541104
*Just because the WWE logo is on it, doesn't mean that it's a fake. WWE could have had the logo added on to it. <sup>---]</sup>] 05:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
*It cant be the original belt. One reason is the original strap was a maroon color it wasnt black. There was more wihte gold it all wasnt yellow gold, and you can look at it and tell like when HBK was World Heavyweight Champion the strap was bigger. Like the leather part around the gold was more thick. Go look at his pic with the belt on WWE.com and look at Batista's or Taker's you will see a difference. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 22:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
----
A few tidbits here. The current belt is not the original. The original was made in Reno, nevada. It was nelson Royal who suggested to Jim Crockett to check out the place in Reno. Last year in Charlotte, I was told Nelson's son actually designed the belt. Contrary to what WWE might claim, they do not have the original belt. The belt Hogan kept wasn't made for Ready To Rumble either. Several former WCW Champs had a cast copy made by the head of their props department. Apparantly this guy was in charge of props back when the belt was first made. Anyway, Diamond Dallas Page has a copy, it was releathered by Dave Millican and the back of each plate had the caster's info with the #5 (apparantly at least 5 copies exist). The belt Hogan has is a cast copy with Jeff Jarrett's name etched on the plate (no nameplate, DDP's has no nameplate either). It seems the original Big Gold disappeared when Scott Steiner was champ. Not surprising since Steiner has stolen belts before. When Scott Steiner was WCW TV Champ in 1993 and was fired (leading to him & Ricjk going to the WWF) he kept that belt. And during The Freebirds first reign as "NWA" World Tag Team Champs, they had new belts made. Both the old pair and the new ones were both on blue leather. What happened? Jimmy Garvin said one was stolen. A few years after WCW went out of business, there was a pic published in a mag that had Scott Steiner in his house with 3 belts ("NWA" World Tag, WCW TV, & the original Big Gold). Reggie Parks made a copy for Flair after he returned to WCW in 1993, supposedly he was gonna do a "Real World Champion" angle there, but it was dropped and he kept the belt. This must be what he gave to Triple H, cause he couldn't have given him the original if he doesn't have it. BTW, only the original Big Gold was dual plated (Silver & Gold plated). All cast copies and the current WWE version are all Gold. Oh, the current WWE version is an etched copy made by their beltmaker Joe Marshall (JMAR). As for the strap color, the original was on a reddish brown, but WCW had it releathered several times. At one point the genuises kept getting it releathered because the sideplates were about to fall off. It didn't dawn on them that the posts were broke and all that needed to be done was to fix them. It was so bad they litterly had tape holding the sideplates on. Hope this clears up a lot.
⚫ ] 05:48 17 March 2009 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
== Edit of 2/24/07 ==


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
I reworked the paragraph on the belt's use in WWE. The way it was written made it seem like the original belt was modified, while it's actually a new copy of the belt. Just thought it could use a rewrite for clarity and accuracy. ] 06:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 23:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original Big Gold Belt is in the hands of Scott Steiner. When Steiner was champ, he claimed it was stolen, carried around a Figures Inc. replica for a few weeks, until a new belt was made. Hogan's copy is a cast copy with Jeff Jarrett's name on the main plate. At last count, at least 5 cast copies were made. Other cast copies were made for Kevin Nash & Diamond Dallas Page (Page's being # 5). The belt Booker T brought into WWE is not the original like WWE claims, it too is just another cast copy. The current belt is an etched version made by WWE beltmaker Joe "JMAR" Marshall. Hogan claims to have the original, but it's not true. BTW, the original was a gift from Jim Crockett to Ric Flair.
MrNWA4Life-4/22/2007 {{unsigned|70.8.197.254|19:03, 22 April 2007 (UTC)}}


== Big Gold, not The Big Gold Belt ==


I'm surprised that it's listed here as Big Gold Belt. It's always referred to as "Big Gold," and as such (even if it's not the technical title), should be referred to as such at least in the title, right? Like how a wrestler's real name may be Michael Hickenbottom, but the title lists them as Shawn Michaels. Thoughts? ] (]) 19:25, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
⚫ == Edits ==
:Sources use "the Big Gold Belt" pretty constantly. To say "it's always referred to as Big Gold" is erroneous. ] (]) 20:13, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
MrNWA4Life is exactly correct. Also, 3bulletproof16 please STOP editing belt pages. I understand you are trying to help, but you are constantly updating pages with incorrect information. Many times you are removing valid facts that can be proven, yet you are editing however you feel free, even going as far as editing anonymously or using other names. Please don't edit belt pages unless you can prove the information you are changing, as well as anyone else editing pages. I do not have time to constantly undo your incorrect edits on every belt page, so if you want proof or verification of information, I would be more than happy to point you to valid, credible sources of facts and information about belts. Feel free to contact me on AIM or YIM under PawNtheSandman --] 02:18, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
:I think ] needs to read ] and take some time off. He has used a and ignored sourced contributions to strong-arm his own views into the article. ] 05:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
::First of all read ]. You have failed to provide a source that states that several casted copies of the belt were created. You have also failed to provide a source that states the belt was crafted by a cowboy belt buckle maker out of Reno, Nevada. in order to justify the re-addition of your removed (unsourced) info is pretty pathetic. Then removing warnings even though you did not (and still haven't) provide a source is just being arrogant. And finally, reverting the removal of ] is plain and simply just being a ]. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 06:26, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
:::Like I said, feel free to IM me and I will give you source after source after source, meanwhile, you do not provide any sources for your material and just bully articles by sitting at home all day and editing the page as they see fit. You are the perfect example of why Misplaced Pages has lost any credibility. It isn't about what is correct, it is about who is willing to waste more time sitting around and changing items to their opinion. The beltmaker from Reno Nevada has been verified from Jim Crockett himself as well as numerous books. DDP's cast belt can be seen on DaveMillicanBelts.com, or just ask DDP and he will tell you he has a cast as well. The list of the 5 casts were provided by the WCW Prop Person who was also the person who had the original Big Gold replated (which is why it got that ugly orange tint eventually), and the prop person is also the man who created the WCW Cruiserweight Tag Titles. You continue to prove time after time you know very little about belts. Like I said, feel free to contact me and I will give you credible source after credible source, not only for this article, but for numerous others that you CONSTANTLY incorrectly edit.--] 12:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
::::Put as many of your sources as you can in the article. If Bulletproof Boy wants to revert it after that, we'll have a case to take to an admin. ] 16:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
:KOC, you are the one who is walking a thin line right now. You continue to add unsourced statements, and then removing the warnings from your talk page by saying you have added sources (despite proof that you have not). ] 00:07, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
:Obviously, you are trying to bully-edit this article since your buddy Bulletproof Boy was scared away. Your abuse will not be tolerated, either. ] 01:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

::Obviously you have absolutely no clue how Misplaced Pages works. We know where the two of you come from, believe me we're used to this (i.e. ] , ] ], ] , ] , ] ], ] ] made], ''']''' ] he was on a wrestling forum, ] ] and ]...], ] ]...], ] ]...], ] ]-]-and ], ] and ] ] characters], and the 'o so loveable Mr. Jonathan Barber himself - ''']''' . You two are probably from some crummy message board filled with fan boys and other ] like these fellas, ] each other and possibly mad at us for removing your nonsense, vandalism, original research, theories, and speculations. You can hate us all you want but at least have a good reason to do so. See you're mad at us (well mostly me) because your contributions get removed. Ok I get that, but do you even know why it is even getting removed? Misplaced Pages is not a place for some guy's theories about how things were made, things that don't have a point, opinions that show how you feel about certain things, predictions on how things will turn out, etc. Look it up in ], it’s all right there. What we do is '''NOT''' remove information and replace it with factual errors. What we do is enforce and uphold Misplaced Pages's three main governing policies (], ], and ]), that’s why we need to remove the things that violate these policies. It's not a matter of ] an article when you are un-doing an ]. We ] when we see editors make these changes and we easily correct them and refer them to the proper policy or guideline that can help them contribute better to the this project called ] without criticizing their edit. I think its funny, ], how you tell others to ] when it is actually you who is assuming bad faith. Go ahead and take a look at the list on ''']'''. Right off the bat I can tell numbers 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 16, 19, and 20 fit you very well. Instead of endlessly reverting for the sake of reverting, why not just take a break? Look, if you did in fact provide a source to your edit about how ''"Several casted copies of the belt were created in 2000, and given to a handful of past WCW World champions"'' then why not refer us to your source and correct our mistake instead of continuing to tell us that we can't see for shit and that Now ], the thing on how ''"The belt was believed to been crafted by a cowboy belt buckle maker out of Reno, Nevada"'' just simply cannot be added even with a source. I'm not doubting anything you add in any way, shape, or form, but Misplaced Pages policy basically states per ] that facts, assertions, theories, ideas, claims, opinions, and arguments that have not been published by a reputable publisher '''cannot''' be published in Misplaced Pages. Before you start judging people again, remember that its not me talking here, its Misplaced Pages policy. Whether the two of you choose to follow these policies while editing here is up to you, but I wouldn't recommend not doing so if you don't want to end up like the people I noted earlier. Oh and ] just to clarify another thing, your edit to ] had to be reverted for a number of reasons. For one, the image you uploaded of the belt had no copyright status, source, or fair use rationale, which is why an administrator deleted it. For clarification on what those things mean please see ]. Secondly, the note about J-Mar was also unsourced which, yes, did violate ]. Now if you say you do have reliable sources for that note then I encourage you to add them to the article. For help on that see ]. Oh and next time, remember to add whatever reliable source it is you have while making an edit here instead of having to wait until someone asks you for one. I hope this clarified a lot of things for the two of you and who ever else hates us out there. I'd preferred that you would hear this from an administrator instead of myself, but if you still feel that my points are not valid then I could refer you to Lord Deskana. He is well known editor/admin who I respect very much would be more than happy to answer any questions that you may still have. I truly hope this cleared any confusion there may have been and that this wasn't a long read for you. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 08:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

:::Yet you constantly revert edits to wrong information that cannot be proven as well. It is obvious you have nothing better to do then go and change articles as YOU SEE FIT because your articles don't contain factual details nor sources, and in the cases of other articles such as the Wrestlemania 3 attendance, even if people provide sources, you will edit it as YOU see fit. Want to talk about the WCW Hardcore belt? Talk to PRoc who designed the hardcore belt and was improperly credited. Talk to JMar to made it. Use WayBackMachine to view the JMar webpage when he posted the design contest. You want phone numbers and email addresses on these people to, so you can call them and verify it? As for the Big Gold, would you like the name and email address of the WCW prop person who was the person responsible for replating the original, and getting the casts made? DDP's cast can be viewed on the DaveMillicanBelts.com website. Kevin Nash has stated in numerous interviews he owns a copy. View Bash at the Beach 2000, Hogan was given a copy not the real one. Jarrett has a copy and Steiner claims he was given a copy, although like the article CORRECTLY states, there is much debate over who has the real belt, either WWE or Steiner, but through pictures Steiner posted and up close pictures of the belt WWE used right after the WCW buyout, most people tend to believe Steiner has the real one. If the whole debate about Steiner or WWE owning the real belt be left in without citing sources, then why can't the origin of the belt being made in Reno, Nevada not be left without citing a source. I believe at least 2 books mentioned it. I believe one was Ric Flair's autobiography, and the other which I know for sure mentions it is Sex, Lies and Headlocks, also old interviews with Jim Crockett mention the belt buckle maker as well. There are websites, webforums dedicated to belts, as well as the beltmaker's themselves who can provide you with information on any of the belts. You just like the power trip. Like I said, I'm not going to come and revert all the edits daily like you do. I'll just say that people like you 3bulletproof16 and your other fake names, and people like you on other subjects is why Misplaced Pages has gotten such a backlash and negative reputation.--] 16:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

::::The problem with your argument right there is that you keep saying that I remove un-cited information and replace it with information that contradicts your claim and includes sources. The problem is that that's just how Misplaced Pages works. Its three main governing policies (], ], and ]) define this very clearly. You are also under the impression that the ] attendance dispute was just me having a problem with Meltzer's number. Have you even taken a look at the talk page? Every member from ], including administrators that are neutral in the argument agree that the attendance number stated by Meltzer requires more reliable sources. That’s not just me talking. I don't want phone numbers, I don't want email addresses. I, along with admins and other users want reliable sources! That’s all Misplaced Pages asks for. You keep telling me to talk JMar, to talk to PRoc, etc. Now I'm telling you to quit telling me to talk to all these different people and '''add your sources to the article!!!''' Don't keep telling us that you have all these wonderful sources and not add any of them while expecting us to believe you. Again take a look at ]. And you're wrong; the whole debate about Steiner or WWE owning the real belt isn’t left in without a source. It was removed because it had no source except for a link that takes you nowhere. But your good friend King of Cable decided to revert and leave it there anyways in violation of ]. And no it is not because of people like me that Misplaced Pages has gotten such a backlash and negative reputation. It is because of misinformed people like yourself that misinterpret guidelines and policies, spend all your time hating Misplaced Pages and plotting revenge on those responsible for removing your work instead of listening to the voice a reason and figuring out why exactly people found an error in your contribution. You can keep thinking that I am an evil power hungry maniac all you want but I can think of a dozen of administrators, including one ] who would beg to differ. If you hate Misplaced Pages for a number of reasons, have those reasons at least be intelligent. I suggest you read ]. -- ] <sup>]</sup> 17:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

:I guess we've got Bulletproof Boy making long-winded personal attacks now... ] 13:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
::Intelligent reply, I might add.-- ] <sup>]</sup> 17:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

== Ownership of the belt (Early 1990's WWF "Real World's Champion" angle ==

The original NWA bylaws required a deposit not on the title belt, but as a bond to ensure the champion would meet his appearance obligations.

Ric Flair, as a result of his $25,000 deposit, may have believed that he owned the belt, but it likely remained the property of JCP/WCW at that time. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
----
The $25,000 deposit covered the original Domed Globe. Flair never got his actual deposit back from the NWA, and he still has the original Domed Globe to this day. The original Big Gold was a gift from Jim Crockett to Flair. Both Nelson Royal and George South confirmed this. Flair essentially sold the belt to WCW for what the cost of his NWA deposit was plus interest in late 1991.
] 06:40 17 March 2009

Latest revision as of 19:39, 24 January 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Big Gold Belt article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconProfessional wrestling High‑importance
WikiProject iconBig Gold Belt 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
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Actual Debut

The actual debut wasn't a February 22 episode of World Championship Wrestling. It actually debuted on a February 14, 1986 Florida show called Battle of The Belts II where Ric Flair defended the NWA World Title against Barry Windham. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.106.110.147 (talk) 20:54, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Move

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Closed as no consensus to move.

From Big Gold Belt to Big Gold Championship..... NXT Fan (talk) 07:00, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Oppose from me seeing as this isn't a Championship its a Belt.--SteamIron 10:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This article is not about a championship. This article is about the belt, which has represented multiple championships. oknazevad talk 16:43, 10 March 2011(UTC)
  • Oppose per above comments. The article is about the belt that has represented multiple championships. It isn't an actual championship itself. 22:36, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. WWE owns the Big Gold thing, its history, its heritage, and its definition. if WWE dislikes the term "belt", we should reflect this. WCW Fan 2000 (talk) 07:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Its a belt not a Championship. The belt it self has represented many championship but has never be a Championship in itself.--SteamIron 07:50, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
But under current WWE terminology the word "belt" has been replaced by "championship:. And the belt/championship/whatever is owned by WWE, adn that's how they refer to it. WCW Fan 2000 (talk) 07:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Still this is a Belt not a championship and it doesnt matter what wwe calls it they have no say here.--SteamIron 08:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
While you're right Dcheagle, its not even about that. What it ultimately comes down to is that this is not the WWE encyclopedia. We are not WWE centric as we try to maintain a neutral point of view. An example of this is that while WWE removes all references pertaining to the WWF trademark, we do not. Thus there was never a valid point to NXT Fan's or WCW Fan 2000's argument - two accounts that are clearly operated by a single user. 02:13, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

WWE history claims

WWE claims they own the history of the Big Gold Belt? That's hilarious. They may own all the video tape history and they own WCW which the belt used to represent, but for 7 1/2 years it represented the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. WWE does not own that. MrNWA4Life 10:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

No, they (correctly) claim they own the copyright and trademark to the design (which was owned by Crockett, and WCW as their successor, not the NWA) and the WCW title history since 1991. And there's an easier way to sign posts that won't trigger an unsigned post bot: sign with four tildes at the end (these things ~) oknazevad (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
They actually don't own the copyright and/or trademark to the actual original design. The reason they added the WWE logo to the main plate in 2003 was so that they could copyright that particular design of the belt. 18:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I think you may be right. Now that you mention it, I remember reading that part of the reason for the changed designs of the then WWF Championship and IC title belts during the Attitude Era was that the previous designs weren't trademarked or copyrighted and many independents (including the early ECW) were using substantially similar designs (such as the ECW TV title when RVD first won it). That said, the point that the WWE does own the WCW title lineage is correct. oknazevad (talk) 19:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

nWo

The original plan was to have the nWo as a second promotion that would run nWo Nitro while WCW ran Thunder, similar to WWE having RAW ECW & Smackdown as seperate shows with their own titles & roster. Now this never happened, but shouldnt some mention be made to the nWo branding the title with their letters? Even the WCW World Title history should make mention of that occurring. 24.24.231.104 (talk) 01:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Big Gold Belt. 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) 23:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Big Gold, not The Big Gold Belt

I'm surprised that it's listed here as Big Gold Belt. It's always referred to as "Big Gold," and as such (even if it's not the technical title), should be referred to as such at least in the title, right? Like how a wrestler's real name may be Michael Hickenbottom, but the title lists them as Shawn Michaels. Thoughts? SalvadorZombie (talk) 19:25, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Sources use "the Big Gold Belt" pretty constantly. To say "it's always referred to as Big Gold" is erroneous. oknazevad (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
Categories: