Herbert O'Breen

Regarding this edit [1]

"storyline world championship"? "does not hold legitimate "world" title status"?

Wow... smart marks really are marks now-a-days... ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 06:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Really, you are one of some recent new editors who have inputted similar information on the article. I've always asked each of them for their reason as to why they inserted that obvious personal sentiment, but I have yet to receive an actual response or even have them engage in a detailed discussion regarding the issue. (That being about the ECW title and world status) I would love to discuss the matter with you to get your argument. I hope you reply on this talk page. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 06:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Does not have "world" in title name. Not acknowledged by PWI.

The WWE Championship doesn't have "world" in its title name and is no longer acknowledged by PWI either, so tell me, what is your point?^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 06:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Really? You're just going to leave it at that? Well, I just hope you are willing to spend more than 2 minutes on a discussion next time. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 07:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I was away from the computer. There is a world outside, you know. I know the WWE Championship doesn't have world status either. The only title in WWE with valid world title status is the World Heavyweight Championship. Herbert O'Breen (talk) 08:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

No, that is incorrect. A world title is determined by if it is defended world-wide and the company which owns it considers it a world championship. PWI has nothing to do with a world title. It is irrelevant. They have no power. They were given power by no one. They just publisher their own opinions. Now please do not add that back PWI does not consider it a world title again or you will be reported for 3RR.--WillC 08:22, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Care to back up your opinion?

Which part? WWE considers both world titles, they have both been defended world-wide, PWI has no power.--WillC

A reply to this I was away from the computer. There is a world outside, you know. I know the WWE Championship doesn't have world status either. The only title in WWE with valid world title status is the World Heavyweight Championship.

You having said that, I now ask why then if you acknowledge that PWI no longer recognizes the WWE Championship would you continue to use PWI to cite your view on the ECW Championship. By your argument, shouln't the same "non-world title" argument be used on the WWE title article?^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 17:14, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

With you reverting once again, I plan to report you for 3RR and have you blocked from editting.--17:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

PWI is the standard bearer within the industry. We go by their views here at Wikipedia - end of. Herbert O'Breen (talk) 17:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Then why don't I see you adding that to the WWE Championship? Thats just plain bias on your part. Additionally... would you care to show me the policy that states that we go by PWI's views here at Wikipedia. Surely an experienced editor as yourself could do that. ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 17:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm trying to introduce the truth here first before tackling the WWE Championship. The bias there would be overwhelming. Herbert O'Breen (talk) 17:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you mind pointing me towards the policy which dictates that editors should abide by PWI's views?^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 17:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing the page. The title DOES have world title status, period. This has been discussed many times on both the titles talkpage and at WP:PW. I love PWI, but they do NOT decide what are world titles and what aren't world titles. The ECW Championship is considered a world title by WWE, it's defend on television and PPV's and is defended all across the world. TJ Spyke 17:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on ECW Championship. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. TJ Spyke 17:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Also note that we have a number of confirmed socks under your IP address 89.168.172.85 (John_F_Grant EdgarBacon Born_of_Champions FTWBruce Brendan Heron) ^{--UnquestionableTruth--} 17:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

They're hardly confirmed, because three of them are news to me. I take credit for two.Herbert O'Breen (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, first Pro Wrestling Illustrated means nothing. To show this is so, before PWI existed, how were world titles recognized? By promotions. How are titles still recognized today as world titles. By promotions. PWI were given no power by anyone other than the wrestling fan because they buy the magizine. The wrestling fan has no power either. They can't say to a promotion "Hey, your belt is not a world title because I say so". That is like saying to a cop, "you can not arrest me because I say so" It is completely useless. This has been discussed many many many times before to either follow PWI or ignore PWI. With PWI's flawed list of world championships and not announcing their criteria for a world championship it isn't a safe list to follow. When it comes down to it, the promotion always and I mean always determines what a world championship is.--WillC 18:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

But this is 2009. And today, PWI dictates what is a world title, and what isn't. Herbert O'Breen (talk) 19:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Uh, no they don't. Can you bring me a source to how that was established? What power they were given, etc? If not, then we don't go by them. This is an encyclopedia. It goes by facts. Does not go by what a promotion my rewrite, does it go by a belief that PWI has power, nor does it go by the opinions of PWI, and that is all they are opinions. If WWE were to say the ECW Title is no longer a world title, then that would be reflected. But if they said the ECW Title was made by a pink fairy in wonderland. Then we wouldn't, because it isn't true. We may note the bullshit they are spinning, but we won't say that is how the belt was actually made. See where I'm going with this? Fact > Fiction.--WillC 21:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Simple question for you. Why do you believe that PWI dictates that? If we know that, the project may be able to sere where you are coming from in a different light. Help us understand. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 20:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)