Talk:NXT Women's Championship

Don't Vandalize the page and put Stupid Bullshit

Someone is messing up every single current championship in WWE. Includes: changing current champion name, messing up infoboxes, and messing up charts and tables. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B825:6940:A0BD:98B5:153A:C91D (talk) 21:29, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit request

The most recent edit added the combined reigns, which apparently consensus says is not necessary. The editor claimed "people like to see it", which is a nonsense reason. "Not necessary" on an encyclopedia should mean it goes whether we want to see it or not. Please revert the most recent edit. 110.148.128.37 (talk) 21:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done - by another - Arjayay (talk) 07:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 6 October 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Fairly unconvincing arguments from both sides, so as it's a 2–1 split I'm calling it no consensus, which means we default to the status quo. Created a redirect from the proposed title. Jenks24 (talk) 11:41, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: the initial closure was made when the discussion looked like this. There was subsequent reverting of the close and blanking of various comments, including a blanking of the full discussion. See the history for a more detailed explanation. Despite the relisting, I'm reinstating my close here (and adding back any comments that have been blanked) – it is clear that there will not be a consensus to move the article (indeed, there is now arguably a consensus against moving) and RMs may be closed any time after the first seven day listing period, regardless of relists. Jenks24 (talk) 12:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

---

NXT Women's Championship → NXT Womens Championship – there is no apostrophe written on the belt itself which should be the authority on stylizing. Also falls in line with WWE Divas Championship which has no apostrophe. -- Ranze (talk) 03:12, 6 October 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 00:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Tiggerjay (talk) 06:50, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

My answer is no. -Keith Okamoto (talk) 00:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I support this answer. No. Mega Z090 (talk) 10:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

• Re-instated relisting due to dubious removal of relisting. That being said, I still oppose this move. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Oppose per MOS:POSS and third party reliable sources include the possessive form with apostrophe. A redirect is sufficient for the alternate spelling. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Asuka is the LONGEST reigning champ.

To those who concern, I have changed the longest Reign to Asuka because it was official on WWE.com that Asuka had become the longest reigning NXT Women's Champion in history, not Paige. WWEEdit (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

WWE.com is incorrect. WP, for every wrestling championship, always uses the date that the title changed hands. A note is then made as to when the match aired, if it did not air live. WWE.com rewrites and changes history at the drop of a hat. Sometimes they go by the date a title change happened, sometimes they go by the date the title change aired. To keep consistency WP always goes by the date the title change actually happened. OldSkool01 (talk) 05:39, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit request

Now Asuka REALLY is the lomgest reigning champ, and statistics table needs an update.176.36.57.234 (talk) 01:15, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

It's done now.176.36.57.234 (talk) 04:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2017

Asuka has been champion for 505 days now, so please change it. 75.88.14.180 (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Already done 506+ days covers it. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Asuka reign length

I see in the table listing all the title reigns, Asuka is incorrectly listed as reigning for 510 days, and vacating the title August 24th. However, that is based on when the NXT episode featuring her handing over the title was taped, not when the show aired, which was tonight, September 6, 2017, and WWE made a statement after it was known she had injured her collarbone in her title defense against Ember Moon that they would be officially recognizing her title reign as ending when the show aired, not when it was taped, so at the least, for her vacancy, it should be noted, if the community on WP disagree, that WWE consider her reign to have lasted 523 days, not 510. Thank You. ADg2k14 (talk) 03:18, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

@ADg2k14: The main table notes the actual title length, as in when it actually happened in real life. If there is any discrepancy between that and what WWE officially recognizes, that is noted in the very last box on the right, which is done with Asuka where it says her reign is 523 as recognized by WWE and ending on September 6. This is based on community consensus. --JDC808 ♫ 03:40, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

@JDC808: I understand the logic in the community consensus. However, perhaps this should merit some additional discussion as WWE specifically went out of their way to state that Asuka's reign is officially considered to have lasted 523 days (until the date that episode of the title vacancy aired). The closest thing I can think of would be when Edge retired in 2011. He first announced his retirement during Raw that week, but did not surrender the World Heavyweight Championship until the SmackDown tapings the following night (which aired on the Friday of that week). Either way, WWE recognizes Edge's reign ending on the episode of SmackDown instead of on Raw. Perhaps Asuka's reign should follow this precedent? SilentGanda (talk) 20:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

@SilentGanda: That doesn't change anything we have here. Everything is accounted for. The "real" date is in the main column. If WWE recognizes a different date, as they have here with Asuka, it is notated in the "Notes" column. We are not leaving it out. This community consensus was based on a discussion that I actually started and also involved Asuka. When Asuka hit 275 days as champion, WWE said she was the longest reigning champion, but in reality, it was Paige at 308, but because of tape delays, they only recognized Paige as champion for 274 days. We needed a way to notate this discrepancy, and how it is done now is the consensus that we came to. In response to Edge's reign, it is done the same way on the List of World Heavyweight Champions (WWE) article as it is done here. --JDC808 ♫ 20:34, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Since the WWE is in charge of the storyline, the *real* date is whatever date they say it is and the length of her championship is whatever they say it is. This is the nature of a scripted drama. The listed length should always be in line with whatever WWE says (since they are the final arbiter, just as a book author or filmmaker is with their story). Any discrepancy with reality should be in the notes. But, hey, I get consensus. You guys will do what you think it right. Just adding my two cents.24.149.37.233 (talk) 03:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree with you, as in one light, professional wrestling, especially WWE, is a TV show and with other TV shows, we present what happens on-screen of that universe, while the off-screen stuff goes in production sections etc. Wikipedia is supposed to present the reality of it, which is why we have the "real" dates, but at the same time, I find that silly considering this is a fictional universe (all professional wrestling is fictional if we want to go there), so why are we trying to present this as something real? This is something to be brought up with the project as a whole. Consensus is why we go with the current format, but I was at least able to get us to acknowledge what WWE says their reigns are, that way we're covering all bases. --JDC808 ♫ 04:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Why Would Ember Moon be in the Women’s Royal Rumble as Nxt Women’s Champion?

Why on Earth would Ember Moon be in the 2018 Royal Rumble Match. If she is still Nxt Women,s Champion I Doubt she signed a WWE Main Roster if she is still Nxt Champion. Infinite Kid (talk) 20:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

They needed 30 women for the Royal Rumble, and they decided to have her in it. She obviously wasn't going to win because she was champion. But I guess you haven't watched since WrestleMania because she lost the title at NXT TakeOver: New Orleans, and is now on Raw. --JDC808 ♫ 19:42, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Actually JDC808 I watched Every PayPerView Since Wrestlemania. Infinite Kid (talk) 17:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Then why did you say: "If she is still Nxt Women,s Champion I Doubt she signed a WWE Main Roster if she is still Nxt Champion"? If you have been watching since WrestleMania, then you'd know that she is not champion anymore, nor on NXT, and is on the main roster now (on Raw). --JDC808 ♫ 02:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 October 2019

you need to add they made the new nxt women’s title cause Paige had Brad Maddox defile it. 2600:1000:B16F:55F0:DCD2:1229:F22:B00E (talk) 18:54, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Please provide a source for the changes you want made - Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 18:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Not sure if your response was a joke Galatz, but to answer the IP, that wasn't the reason. That incident occurred 3-4 years before they made the new title. --JDC808 ♫ 19:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Article renaming

Now that the title has officially been re-christened to remove its gender-specific designation and is now simply the NXT Championship [1], the title of the article should be changed. This should also apply to the article on the NXT UK women's title as well.DigificWriter (talk) 06:05, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

False. "NXT Women's Championship" is still the common name. More so than "NXT Championship (Women's verion)" AEWFanboy 20:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AEWFanboy (talk • contribs)

The correct guide to point to is WP:NAMECHANGES. You look at what its called by WP:SECONDARY RS after the name change. - Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 20:19, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

And last night on NXT they were back to calling it the NXT Women's Championship. Last week (January 22nd), and at the Worlds Collide show on Saturday, they were calling it simply the "NXT Championship". Even the on-screen graphics said NXT Championship. Now last night it was back to being called "NXT Women's Championship", even the on-screen graphic said it. OldSkool01 (talk) 16:41, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Also, when Shayna came out at the Royal Rumble, they said she was a former NXT Women's Champion. The rumors were that it was basically a test run to see how it would go over. Guess it went poorly. --JDC808 ♫ 20:56, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

PS JDC808, Shayna would have only won the title when it was still called the "NXT Women's Championship" so that doesn't really help, lol. AEWFanboy 21:33, 2 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AEWFanboy (talk • contribs)

Actually it does. The WWE Championship has had several different names, but they only say WWE Championship for past champions, regardless of what it was called when a wrestler held it. --JDC808 ♫ 07:47, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

When WWE renamed a championship the previous name vanishes. When was the last time you heard WWE refer to Hulk Hogan as the WWF World Heavy Champion? - Galatz גאליץ^{שיחה Talk} 15:29, 3 February 2020 (UTC)