Talk:Extreme Championship Wrestling/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive for Talk:Extreme Championship Wrestling

Requested Move

Extreme Championship Wrestling → ECW - ECW is currently a redirect page for ECW (disambiguation). ECW is known more with the wrestling organization than the English Civil War or Ensoniq AudioPCI. A top level link would direct individuals searching for those topics Kyros 00:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~'
  • Support: ECW is synonymous with wrestling, change page. DemonWeb 00:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose TLAs should be disambiguation pages unless there is only one use for it; which is not the case here. ECW (disambiguation) should be moved to ECW and left there. Septentrionalis 05:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Not moved as no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 09:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Profanity

There's been some editing issues regarding the inclusion of profanity in the Crowd chants part of the article. I don't like those words, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Profanity states that profanity is perfectly acceptable in the context of a relevant quote, which is exactly what we have in this section. For the sake of accuracy and staying true to the subject matter, I believe we should probably leave them in. --Jtalledo (talk) 06:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

McMahon funding ECW?

On the 23rd May 2005 RAW, McMahon claimed that he funded ECW in order to steal.. uuh I mean grow new WWE talent. Correct? Or work?

--Vodex 09:01, May 28, 2005 (UTC)


It was just a work. WWE never funded ECW - the only thing they did do was allow ECW to take a loan out in 2001, just before the company died.

Yazman 14:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)Yazman

Not so Yazman. You are confusing this with the fact that on the May 23rd, 2005 Raw Vince cut a promo in the ring with Eric Bischoff and Paul Heyman and said there was a line item on the ECW bankruptcy totalling some $900,000 given to ECW by WWE. Just because ECW was in debt to WWE at bankruptcy doesn't mean Vince wasn't bankrolling the organization for years; which on Rise and Fall is admitted to by both Paul and Vince. In fact McMahon claims it was only right to compensate ECW for using their talent; which he claims WCW never did. BronzeWarrior 08:43, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

hmmm...I was under the impression that on the Rise and Fall of ECW DVD Heyman admitted that Vince had funded him for many years.

Totally unrelated question, but why is the section entitled "One Night Stand" just about the buildup to the PPV instead of the event itself?

Vince did look at ECW talent and also put some of his wrestlers onto the ECW roster such as Al snow

When ECW was in major financial trouble McMahon was financially supporting the ECW. Devon Dudley mentioned this in an interview and it was alluded to on the Rise and Fall of ECW DVD. When McMahon wanted an ECW wrestler, Heyman would allowed the performer to leave for the WWE. Devon also mentioned this in a radio interview. Kyros 04:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

History: The Night the Line Was Crossed

I realize that right now this is part of the section for Eastern Championship Wrestling, but I think this de-emphasizes just how important breaking with the NWA was and how disrespectful it was seen to be at the time (something Forever Hardcore covered better than The Rise and Fall of ECW) but how necessary it was. I would suggest that instead of having a seperate chapter for Eastern Championship Wrestling the "history" be merged together. In particular this would also benefit the history section itself which I think unfairly starts with "The Crucifixion." It seems like the history needs to be fleshed out in general. BronzeWarrior 08:41, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Some Serious Re-writes Needed

I think this entire page needs some serious rewriting, too much is just stolen from http://www.wrestleview.com/info/faq/ecw.shtml and contains large amounts of POV language. R-T-C 09:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

TWO PAGES FOR ECW IS ABSOLUTELY REDUNDANT. CONSOLDIATE THESE, ASAP.

'Topic was created and unsigned by 71.107.251.31' Kyros 08:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually two pages are not redundant because first of all this article is already to big. Second, the new ECW focuses on the WWE ownership. Kyros 08:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Not redundant because one of them covers the promotions and the other covers the new WWE brand. --Trick man01 06:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
They did overlap quite a bit until I reworded the other article and added it as a main link to the new promotion section of this article, after which the calls to merge had stopped. --JFred 08:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Bring Your Own Weapon Night

Just a heads up that at the time I was an annonymous user, but I was the one who updated the "Trademark" section with the info. on "Bring Your Own Weapon Night." There was a lot of untrue stuff in this section prior to my addition, mostly involving how ECW supposedly used full frontal nudity regularly including an all-naked team of women in response to the WWF divas. ECW was already on its way down the tubes when WWF pushed the diva angle to the fore front so this is way off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Claytonjames (talk • contribs)

Actually you're still anonymous since you forgot to sign the post. Use four tildes at the end like this - ~ ~ ~ ~, without the spaces in between. Thanks! BronzeWarrior 11:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Sign Guy

The article as it stands currently links the reference to Sign Guy (of the three ECW Arena Guys) to Lou D'Angeli, who played Sign Guy Dudley. But aren't they different people? The reason I ask is because 1.) they look nothing alike, and 2.) they had a brief (and funny) feud where they would try to one-up each other with their signs. So perhaps it should be unlinked? MattSutton1 19:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

RUMORS

I do not think Rumors should be included, this is not a news site, only facts should be inlcuded.

If it is not offically confirmed, it should NOT be included.--4.250.60.188 03:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Edit: I signed it, thanks I just forgot--4.250.60.188 03:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


1) Please sign your messages, it just helps keeping things straight.
2) Most rumors shouldnt be included, and are routinely removed, but a lot of times, rumors end up being true. Wikipedia cant have them stated usually because wrestling rumor sites, however accurate they actually are, are still classified as rumor sites. Kind of a kick in the backside most of the time. DemonWeb 01:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


There are MANY rumors posted without any sources in the Television Return? section

Please stick to facts and confirmed news only people, this is NOT a rumor site it is an encyclopedia. --4.250.192.120 22:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

The SAT

Can someone provide a source that shows where Joel and Jose Maximo have been discussed as potential members of ECW? It seems particularly unlikely as they were never in ECW, and unlike CM Punk they don't appear to have the support of Paul Heyman nor anyone else in WWE, plus their stock hasn't been that high in recent years. --Kiltman67 16:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Ring Dimensions

I feel that it is important to point out the small size of the ECW ring compared with other promotions such as WCW and WWF. While I do not know the exact dimensions I'm sure one of you guys do --Trick man01 02:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was just 18x18, the same as many Indies and WCW themselves I believe. Is it not more worth making a mention of ring size in the WWE article because it is in fact their 20x20 which is unusual, as many wrestlers say when making the move from the Indies up to WWE. --Kiltman67 20:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
From what I understand, ECW purchaced an older WCW ring that was then refurbished in Paul Heyman's backyard. If memory serves, Eastern Championship Wrestling bought it while still a member of the NWA, and used it until the federation folded. Therefore, it's an 18x18 ring. Crimson Ghost 05:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Ecw in Canada

Where is Ecw going to air in Canada? We don't pick up the Sci-Fi Channel.

As of now, theres been no news about where it'll air in Canada, if at all. ( And please sign your messages. ) DemonWeb 13:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Does Velocity air in Canada? Because rumor has it WWE is planning on replacing Velocity with ECW in international markets where Velocity still airs. Of course, that's just a rumor for now, and nothing has been announced officially (then again, the Sci Fi thing was just a rumor at first, too). Jeff Silvers 17:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
No, Velocity airs for us the same way as for the US, as an internet show on WWE.com, but the last rumor I read was that they were attempting to find someone to broadcast ECW for us in Canada.DemonWeb 18:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Television Return

Is this section actually needed? All the information would fit in just as well in the revival section. --Kiltman67 15:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

It's possible some people might need to see it and wouldn't check elsewhere. TheDingbat 23:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

XPW

Is the XPW section needed? It really did nothing to further or hinder the promotion. Also, to my knowledge, most of the ECW documentaries do not even cover an attempt deal Kyros 05:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Relationship between this page and ECW (WWE) page

There are a few things that could be changed, like the new WWE page not covering the Invasion or the documentaries, just the relaunch, and have the new WWE page be the main article for the relaunch section on this page. --JFred 18:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, this page could do with a general cleanup according to WP:SS, but your proprosal is an excellent suggestion in that light. This page ends up just being a summary of ECW with sub-articles providing the details. Big advantage is that it solves the 'size' issue.--Bobblehead 18:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Archive created

I went ahead and archived some of the old stuff and the merge requests. I'll head over to Extreme Championship Wrestling (WWE) and do the same. --Bobblehead 16:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Crucifixion angle.

The article mentions an angle involving Raven and Sandman as being one of the most controversial in pro wrestling history, but it does not describe the angle even briefly. It would improve the article if someone knowledgeable of the angle elaborated on this. - KB 08:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


raven and the sandman had been feuding for a few months and when raven ahd beaten his opponent, he would handcuf them to the ropes in a crucifix position. the story was that the sandman was getting devorsed, and raven was nailing sandmans ex, but the sandman said hat he didn't care, but a few weeks later the sandmans son said to teh sandman ' i don't love you any more, your a drunk' and declared his lobve for raven. in a promo sandmans son was waring a raven attire, and at teh end both raven and the sandmans son were doing the famus crucifix stance. anyway the crucifix was another level to what raven did with the ring ropes, which was made by teh snamdan. the only reason was because an olympic medalist from '96 who was thinkin about going into profesional wretlingwas doing commentry for teh match (kurt angle) was offended.

it has been quoted that the sandman and raven did not see what all of the fuss was all about nd also taht teh sandman has been quoted ot say 'if it had happened 2 years later in my career, when i had more power, would have told scott not to go out and applogise to the fans. also it should be noted that paul haymen had no idea what happened until after, when a fuming angle told him.

hope that answers the question—Preceding unsigned comment added by AH321 (talk • contribs)

WWE "owning" the promotion

Technically, WWE didn't buy ECW the promotion, just the video library and the right to the name and such, which happened post bankrupcy, so I don't think WWE should be listed as an owner of the promotion. --JFred 01:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

While it is true that WWE did not buy HHG Corp, it bought everything of value related to the ECW promotion. It bought the video library, the trademarks and copyrights, etc. It even bought out the contracts of the top tier ECW talents. Paul Heynman tried to get away with filing HHG Corp under a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, but it was converted to a Chapter 7. HHG Corporation was liquidated, ECW the promotion was not. If this article was about HHG, then there would be reason to have 2 articles, but it is about ECW. By purchasing everything related to ECW, WWE in all intents and purposes owns the ECW promotion. --Bobblehead 17:55, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Ah, got it. Did HHG own anything other than ECW? I thought HHG was just the corporate name for ECW. --JFred 00:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

You know that the creator of what is now WWE was one of the group of men responsible for promotions such as ECW, WCW.... the list goes on. James McMahon, Grandfather of Vincent K. McMahon (current owner of WWE). It is all down on WWE's article. Have that for your pro wrerstling history. Dunno why I put that in, I just felt that all of those WWE haters out there, the father of WWE is the father of Pro wrestling as we know it. K-man-1 20:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The man who created pro wrestling is dead, and yes he created pro wrestling, but not pro wrestling as we know it. When WCW and ECW died, the WWE became something that a lot of people just don't like, and we are not going to change our opinions because of what Vince's grandpa did. His grandpa created pro wrestling, but I think Vince is going to kill it, burn it, and burry it somewhere where whoever would want to find it again would have no chance. So, yes, the father of the WWE is the father of Pro Wrestling, but I think even he would be ashamed of what his grandson has turned it into. Hybrid 06:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Concerning ECW's ownership from 2001-2003...

How is it disputed when the company didn't even exist during that time? Technically, no one owned ECW @ 2001-2003, because there was nothing of ECW to own. WWE may have revived "ECW" as a stable in WWE at that time, but the promotion was dead, just as it still is today. So, that matter is settled then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.68.235 (talk • contribs)

Sounds about right... --Jtalledo (talk) 04:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I may be wrong, but I think that ecw joining the invasion was clearly to either help ecw get back on track (if it was it failed) or to hint that ecw was regaining powerand would be back. (which if you think about it could be posssible) K-man-1 20:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
ECW joining the Invasion on 9 July 2001 was a snap decision based on the terrible crowd reactions to the Buff Bagwell-Booker T WCW Title match that had main-evented RAW the preceding week. WWE nearly lost total faith in the Invasion angle based on that segment alone, but the addition of ECW to WCW's side was intended to revive interest in the angle, in addition to providing a place for a lot of the ECW alums that weren't being used in a major role during the Invasion storyline.
However, WWE decided to use the ECW name and logo without checking to see who had the rights to it. At that time, the assets of the former ECW were still being split in bankruptcy court and WWE was technically infringing on the ECW trademark. That's why the 'ECW' name was phased out in favor of 'The Alliance' to circumvent that problem. WWE didn't get all of ECW's assets until 2003. Slickster 20:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

ECW Revival

Joey Styles "shoots" and "quits", of course that speech which was old school Heyman and was most likely written by him was 100% approved my Vince. More importantly, the ECW seed has been planted. I can't belive people think it was a real shoot, his mic would had been cut off if it was and he would had been fired for real.--4.250.63.36 17:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Um, anybody who thinks it was a real shoot, needs mental help. Even people with no knowledge of wrestling would know that they wouldnt have let it be broadcast if it was real.DemonWeb 18:32, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Good to see it fixed --4.250.0.199 14:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The plot thickens... http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/ecwsignings --4.250.174.72 03:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Removed the part about the website from your edit, since it was implied when I put that it appeared on WWE.com, but thanks for the link. Its about time they confirm something officially and end the speculation. DemonWeb 03:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The Scifi Channel has added an ECW board [1] board on it's official BBoard[2]. I think this pretty much confirms that the revival ECW will be airing on it.

A friend of mine told me that RVD was gonna take the title. He also said that the reason ECW was forming again was because if it didnt, Paul Heyman and Eric Bischoff were gonna go to TNA. Is any of this true? It sounds pretty ridiculous. He claims it's all over the internet but I am yet to have seen anything about this. Realferrari 21:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I read wrestling rumor sites almost 24/7 and i've never heard anything of the sort. No decision for RVD vs Cena has been decided or reported yet, and theres been no talks whatsoever about Bischoff or Heyman going to TNA. There was talks ages ago that if Heyman's contract wasnt renewed, he may go to TNA as an option, but as for all of that being 'all over the internet', your friend would appear to be very wrong. DemonWeb
Thank you. He is an avid fan of ECW so I didn't really disregard anything he said. It just seemed highly unlikely. Realferrari 05:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Looking back at it now, is it any more likely? Since RVD actually did win the title from Cena? Or just a coincidence? RealFerrari 11:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

NYC

  • How come no mention of the Elk's Lodge in Queens, NYC?
  • MSG Network used to show ECW shows on Saturday at 1 am, and Sunday at 2 am. Nyrmetros 21:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, the Elk's Lodge (I forget what they used to call it, the Madhouse of Extreme? And the Dudley's, in their retirement match from ECW said that the Elk's Lodge was Dudleyville) With such a prominent place in the history of ECW it should indeed be mentioned. Der.Gray 03:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • at the same time MSG aired the show, the same show was boradcast at either 2 or 3 am on saturdays over a uhf signal on the channel that would become PAX TV SalTheButcher 08:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Just Hanging In As A Brand of WWE

WHo else thinks it's just hanging in as a brand? WWE is hardly mentioned in it and it hasnt been in any wwe games. i think that its just about to become its own wrestling bussiness. blitzer natu 01:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with the article. This is not a forum for discussion on ECW. Mr. C.C. 07:27, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I missed this in the article...

What day did ECW air on TV? I think this hould be added if not already in. Thanks User:George bennett (cba to sign in)82.44.161.102 13:57, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Popularity

"Wrestlers such as Shane Douglas, Tommy Dreamer, Raven, The Sandman, Cactus Jack, Terry Funk, Sabu, Mikey Whipwreck and Tazz were seen as being too dangerous for the multi-million dollar companies and were given a chance in ECW."

Could someone explain how Mikey Whipwreck (just to use one example) was considered too dangerous for a bigger company? --Citizen Sykes (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Money Owed

$1 for Sabu? That doesn't make sense. Vandalism much? 70.49.207.133 (talk) 18:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

  • That is true he did make $1 as stated in The Rise and Fall of ECW.--Hardcore Hak (talk) 00:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Info in Company Box

I noticed that in the company box it has WWE listed as both a parent company and as the other part of a merger. I may be wrong, my knowledge of business isn't great, but are these not contradictory. Merger seems to imply the coming together of two companies to form something bigger, whereas parent implies an inequality between the participants, which is certainly true in this case as WWE basically came in and bought all the intellectual properties of a dead company. --Kiltman67 00:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest the merger part be removed, or changed to "Sold to" or "Bought by", and such. As you said, merger implies 2 units combining to, typically, create a third, unique entity. A more logical term would be that they were assimilated ( damn you Star Trek ) by WWE, not merged with them. Having WWE as the parent company, since they own ECW, makes more sense. DemonWeb 00:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I'd say remove merger and leave it at that. The full details of how the parent company changed from HHG to WWE are always in the article itself. --Kiltman67 00:57, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


Now that kane has been drafted and big show is smackdown what does it mean for the title will winner of matt hardy and chavo (for usa Title ecw exclusive) swap title s with the winner of ecw title or will they make a new title? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.252.13 (talk) 14:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

About the whole XPW

How is that anyone could think just because Kristi touched Francine that it lead to the fight. I mean unless Kristi touched Francine in a sexual way it really isn't much different then a fan touching a wrestler. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.229.201 (talk) 04:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Mass Transit

Am I stupid in thinking the whole thing could be put under one paragraph, lawsuit and all? 65.43.96.3 (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Widthdrawing from the NWA

This section reads like a Shane Douglas mark's version of events. Can someone rewrite this from NPOV and source their statements? 69.136.13.211 (talk) 00:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The info is factually correct and is sourced, I don't really see the problem. I am not a fan of Shane Douglas, but the info is correct. TJ Spyke 04:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Final Champions?

The WCW page has this section, why not on the ECW page as well considering the pages exist on the ECW titles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.240.233 (talk) 15:57, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Because they have a current champion - Tommy Dreamer. Podgy Stuffn (talk) 09:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

You can't have an ECW information page without mentioning Al Snow

He was the most popular character, and the grand finale of their 1998 pay per view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.45.23 (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL, well figure out a way to add him in. 65.43.96.3 (talk) 17:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

The banner claiming cites are needed is no longer required. I'm removing it. Podgy Stuffn (talk) 03:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

ECW title

Stop listing the WWE's ECW title year run on this page. This article details the original ECW and it's title runs, do not add the WWE runs after 2001. The ECW title, as it pertains to this article, did not exist after 2001. If you want to detail the second run, do so on the actual belt's article.151.203.5.23 (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:PW policy directs that the life span of the title be noted regardless. My suggestion to you is that you let it go.--UnquestionableTruth-- 21:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
To the IP, it's the same title and so the years the title was active should be listed here. It is false to say that the ECW Championship ceased to exist in 2001. TJ Spyke 22:10, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

This article is about the original ECW, thus the titles should ONLY be listed for their active periods IN ECW... and the original ECW (which this article is about, by the way) was not active at any point after 2001. My suggestion to you is to stop bringing in WWE bias. 151.203.5.23 (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

WWE bias? I loved the original ECW. This about factual accuracy. The company may have folded in 2001, but the title continued. TJ Spyke 23:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The title continued, but NOT UNDER THE ORIGINAL ECW. This article is about the original ECW, and as such, the belts listed should only be listed for their runs IN ECW. Rawisrob (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Sci Fi Channel

...the Sci Fi Channel?... the Sci Fi Channel?! whaaaa?...—Preceding unsigned comment added by Viva43 (talk • contribs)

I forget what site, but I swear I saw a site that stated that ECW is on SciFi because it relates to something like "exploding the imagination." 72.38.234.177 01:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

That would be the other ECW show. ShawnIsHere: Now in colors 04:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extreme Championship Wrestling. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Extreme Championship Wrestling. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:27, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Initials?

Why isn't this article at "ECW"? Per WP:COMMONNAME, we should use abbreviations where possible. The full name was only speriodically referred to as such outside the company. -- 92.21.89.60 (talk) 15:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't see why not. WWE gets to have the initials as the article title, therefore I am for this one being given the same respect. Also, please explain your usage of the word "speriodically". -- Wild Bilvis (talk) 13:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
@92.21.89.60, 73.76.55.98 (talk) 17:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Extreme_Championship_Wrestling/Archive_1&oldid=1210746423"