Talk:List of current world boxing champions/Archive 2

Montiel vs. Silva for interim title

On March 28th, Montiel will fight Diego Óscar Silva for the WBO interim Bantamweight title, because on that date, Penalosa will still hold the Bantamweight title. He will have a tune-up fight on February 21st before moving up to fight JuanMa López at 122lb on April 25th. As for the vacant junior bantamweight title, José López has signed to fight Pramuansak Posuwan, the WBO #1 and #2-ranked fighters. claudevsq (talk) 13:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE: Apparently, JuanMa López still hasn't signed for this fight, and Penalosa, after his non-title fight against Meraz this month, is set to defend his bantamweight crown against the interim champion who will be decided on March 28th, otherwise, Penalosa would be stripped off his 118-lb-title, says the WBO. claudevsq (talk) 17:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Manny Pacquiao

This is an e-mail from the WBC:

Dear Friend: Thank you for contacting us.

    Manny Pacquiao is the WBC Lightweight Champion and theWorld Boxing Council will support him 100%.

    He is currently in the voluntary stage of his championship, so he has no mandatory fight.

   If there is anything we can assist you with, please let us know. Kind regards,
                                        Tito Gonzalez
                                         WBC-INFO

claudevsq (talk) 12:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Supports my point earlier in why I disagreed on removing Pacquiao from the list since he is still officially the titleholder. --Denniscmc (talk) 21:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you were right. claudevsq (talk) 11:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

JUST HAD THE WBO ON THE PHONE

The WBO, by request of M. Rivera of O. R. Promotions, elevated Victor Emilio Ramírez to full champion status. The WBO commitee decided so in January during their 21st annual convention. As follows, Maccarinelli vs. Afolabi will indeed be for the interim title. As for Montiel, he vacated his title. See here: http://www.wbo-int.com/ (Under "CHAMPIONS") claudevsq (talk) 19:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Identifying undisputed, super etc. champions

The nb that is used to identify these champions could be improved. Note is more widely understood and less annoying. Any other ideas?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 03:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi! It was east718, an administrator who takes care of this list, who changed it the way it is now. Please go to his talk page and discuss it with him. Thanks! claudevsq (talk) 09:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I think the discussion belongs here. It's about the article, not east718. Looking at it again, I think just putting the note in the table (ex. "Undisputed world champion") is a better solution.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

They must be singular unless we decide to merge the sanctioning bodies columns. A note indicating Chagaev is "Co-Champions." is incorrect--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

That's right, but you added [nb1] to Valuev, so, I thought it was 2 "Co-Champions", but OK... let's keep it in the singular... claudevsq (talk) 11:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Since no one seems to have any other opinions, I'm going to eliminate the notes and put the text in the table, below the champion's name (ex. Interim world champion)--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

This has been instituted by east718 (admin), and I would want to leave it that way, please! claudevsq (talk) 08:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Why? What do you think is better about the "nb" style?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Please, ask the admin east718 on his talkpage, he installed it. It's less overloaded in my opinion. claudevsq (talk) 08:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

If you want east718's opinion, please ask him to add his comments here. Overloaded? It's only three words and would make it clear why an organization has more than one champion. It would also be simpler to edit.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Why m? It's YOU who wants to make a major change, so, it would be more appropriate if you talk to the person who "installed" it... Plus, don't forget we will soon have 8 undisputed world champions, 10 interim champions, 4 WBO Super champions and so on and on... claudevsq (talk) 10:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Another possibility is to leave it as a note when the organization has only one champion and include it in the table when they have more than one champion in a weight class.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 06:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Claudevsq, you reverted these changes with the edit summary "Please discuss such major changes first on discussion page." The changes have been discussed here (and the edit summaries linked to this discussion). The changes to the tables made them easier to understand. What don't you like about the new format?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

If I remember well, we had the note system, anyway, it was admin east718, a good colleague of mine, who introduced the "nb" system a few years back, and I think everybody is by now used to it. Don't forget, SaskSen, if we change too many things, we might lose the "featured list" status. Maybe you could ask east718 to have his opinion as well... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 20:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi. We shouldn't stop improving it for fear of losing featured list status. I'd like another opinion (east718's included), so I'll list it for a third opinion.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

OK! claudevsq (talk) 15:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I think that the table form is easier to read and understand than the footnoted "nb" one. Footnotes from tables do have their place, especially where complicated information needs to be presented that would clutter the table, but in this case, the info seems to fit in the table without problems, so that the reader doesn't have to flip to the end of the page to find out what the note means. There's nothing wrong with the footnotes per se, and they don't break any guidelines that I'm aware of, but they do seem to me to be slightly less helpful than the table format.—Anaxial (talk) 11:26, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Synthesis

The sentences "Thus, all four organizations consider only themselves and the other three organizations to be major sanctioning bodies. They do not consider organizations such as the IBO and IBA to be major sanctioning bodies." look like an unpublished synthesis. See WP:SYNTH--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done The suspect sentences have been removed.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 00:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! claudevsq (talk) 02:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Chagaev co-champion?

Is there a source for this? Everything I've seen says he is Champion-in-Recess. [1] --SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

A "Champion in recess" isn't in recess anymore when he fights again. I don't know if there's a written source since the WBA didn't update its page for over a month, but you may mail or phone them... I saw the match live on TV, and the WBA official said that Valuev and the winner of Chagaev-Drumond would be equal co-world-champions and would have to fight each other no later than June 26, 2009...

By the way, for the first time in history, the WBA sanctioned a fight for the "vacant" undisputed title: February 28, Márquez vs. Díaz, at lightweight, which will also be for the vacant WBO title, Márquez' Ring's title and Díaz' IBO title... Weird! claudevsq (talk) 13:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Contacting the WBA doesn't help. That would violate the WP:No original research policy. The TV broadcast where the WBA official spoke could be a source, but we need his name, at least.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 02:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

How do you think we could get it? Contacting ZDF, or the WBA? Me, I hope the WBA will soon update its page, because before, they updated their page daily, and now, nothing, for over a month. Maybe I'll contact them to ask what's up with the page... claudevsq (talk) 07:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

This is from Valuev's page here on Wikipedia (it was not me who wrote this):

Since Ruslan Chagaev returned from his period in recess with victory over Carl Davis Drumond on February 7, 2009 to retain his title, Valuev is now regarded by the WBA as "Co-Active Champion", along with Chagaev. Valuev had previously been "Active Champion" during the period Chagaev was regarded as "Champion In Recess". Their scheduled fight, which takes place no later than June 26, 2009, will determine who the WBA regard as their "Undisputed Champion".

Maybe, you could ask the person who wrote this (see history) and find out more... Regardless of all that, I know that the "Co-champion-thing" is the right one... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 07:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I just talked to the WBA, and they told me Chagaev was not in recess anymore since he came back on February 7th, contrary to what their latest rankings are reflecting. I was told that they are still updating their new web page (www.wbanews.com). claudevsq (talk) 21:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

The WBA updated their site and are calling Chagaev "champion in recess"--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 06:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

You're right, I phoned them just now, and the same guy that told me he was not in recess anymore now said that he still is. Sorry, not my fault... claudevsq (talk) 17:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, but why did you move Chagaev below Valuev?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Simply, because Valuev is the regular world champion and Chagaev is "only" champion "in recess". For the same reason, we put the interim champions below the regular ones, the regular ones below the super champions and so on... As Chagaev is still in recess, they cannot be co-champions... the situation is still the same as since last August, so, why change something? As for the spelling, we spell the names like BoxRec does. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 19:30, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The WBA still lists Chagaev first. This list should also. I also think Chagaev is more deserving, but that's not really relevant.

Wikipedia spells it Nikolai Valuev. If you think it should change, change that article first.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I changed the name of the article... As for the WBA, I don't think a champion in recess is more important than a regular champion... It's simply because Valuev won his belt after Chagaev that he is listed beyond him... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 18:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Going chronologically, shouldn't Valuev be listed after Chagaev since he won his version of the title after Chagaev won his? That is how it done for the interim champions which is the equivalent of what Valuev is.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

First of all, Valuev is a "regular" world champion, which is NOT what an interim champion is. Not at all! He should be interim champion, to my understanding, but he isn't. And interim champions are ALWAYS listed below regular champions, as are champions "in recess". claudevsq (talk) 08:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Champions in recess are listed first. The WBA lists Chagaev first [2] This list should also.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 16:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

How can you say this? I told you why Chagaev was listed first, and Asloum is only listed first because Canchila is only the interim champion. In this list, we never display regular champions below champions in recess simply because a regular champion is half a point more worth than a champion in recess ;-) Please, now enough of this, OK? Have a nice day, claudevsq (talk) 05:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

But wait, I'll give you another example. Both BoxRec and the IBF do list Abraham as German. Why do you think we put the armenian flag, after two years of having the german one? Just think about it... There's always at leat one user who's not satisfied with what you do... If we put Chagaev first, some other user would come here and complain about it, or simply revert it, believe me. I'm working daily on this list for three years now... Thanks, claudevsq (talk) 05:36, 13 March 2009

I don't know the answer to your question about Abraham. Why the Armenian flag?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Because there were users, especially ONE user, that wanted the armenian flag, plain and simple. He went that far and took it to a near-personal level so that we finally agreed on putting two flags for Abraham, but that should stay an exception... claudevsq (talk) 07:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

NB: They are going to fight each other no later than September anyway... claudevsq (talk) 05:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

What is the source for listing Valuev before Chagaev?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:29, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

You don't really want me to take this question serious... There's no source, but there must be a certain order, and that's the following: - Undisputed or Super world champions - Regular world champions - Champions in recess - Interim world champions

If you have further problems, I suggest you contact an admin, for instance Caribbean H.Q. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 13:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Unless that hierarchy has been published by a reliable source, Wikipedia can't rely on it.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Link to WBA regulations

Re: The link will work in a few days, give them a chance. I already changed it not to forget it afterwards... This is the place to put changes that you want to make in the future.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 17:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

You're right... But I've found the right link on the new page now... It's exactly the same content that the link to the new rules and regulations on their old page, check it out:

http://www.wbaonline.com/legal/WBARulesADOPTEDPUNTACANA2008.pdf

http://wbanews.com/artman/uploads/1/WBARulesADOPTEDPUNTACANA2008.pdf

Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 18:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, before you ask, I've taken out the link to the WBA Championship Fight statistics, simply because the newest one is from 2006. If, on their new page, they will continue the fight stats once the link will work, we may pack it in again... claudevsq (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Two flags for UK/English boxers

This is unnecessarily cluttered. The list should only have one flag unless they hold multiple nationalities.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm absolutely against displaying two flags, but other users DO want two flags, see WP:BOXING, under discussion ("Nationalities")... claudevsq (talk) 12:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Boxing#Nationalities Regards, claudevsq (talk) 13:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That's an interesting discussion, but I didn't see anyone suggesting that UK boxers should have two flags (unless they hold a different nationality, as well). The relevant comments are your opinion that the British flag should be used instead, and your quote of Maya Levy's position that she prefers the UK flagicon. Maybe we should move this discussion to WP:BOXING.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, because I would definitely prefer only one flag - but VK doesn't - and even Caribbean H.Q. opted for a German and Armenian flag for Abraham... If it was for me, no boxer would have more than one flag... claudevsq (talk) 08:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I got it started at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Boxing#Flag_icons_for_UK_boxers. I kept it simple and didn't get into the issue of multiple nationalities for situations like Abraham's, so it will be easier to reach a consensus.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Nationalities

Since when was Darchinyan American? He is Armenian with Australian citizenship- ergo both flags should be on here. This article should reflect this and also what is it with Afolabi being labelled as American? He refers to himself as British; Boxrec is an incredible source of information but is completely unreliable for nationalities, just look at John Duddy as an example of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.110.42 (talk) 13:13, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

BoxRec lists him as American since he fights every 2nd fight or so out of there, and he once said that he is proud to "be American". claudevsq (talk) 05:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Now, they list him as Armenian again.

Well, I've never heard him say that but I won't doubt the veracity of your claim. He does hold a British passport, though, and as I've said has done an interview with Sky Sports in the past where he has described himself as British, so maybe there is a case for both flags. This page gets vandalised too much as it is anyway.

That's right. But we should not have too much boxers to display two flags... this should stay an exception. I never knew Darchinyan had a british passport... thanks for the information! claudevsq (talk) 09:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

BoxRec have dropped their "nationality" field in favour of a country "rated in" field.--Vintagekits (talk) 13:04, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Clearly I was still talking about Afolabi, but lets face it, you are the loquacious self-imposed moderator of this page and everything should be ratified by you and you alone. Australia does fall under the jurisdiction of the Crown, though, so you do make an interesting point there. I'll leave it with you- Good day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.110.42 (talk) 18:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Chris John named Super-Champ?

See here: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=19141 claudevsq (talk) 05:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I just phoned the WBA, and according to them, he hasn't been elevated to "Undisputed" or "Super World Champion". Maybe, he will receive his super belt for 10 successful defences (even if it's already 12), but that's something ELSE. claudevsq (talk) 17:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Gerry Penalosa and Fernando Montiel

Montiel fought Silva for the interim title, Penalosa still holds the full title, but only up to April25th, because he wants to enter the ring as champion against Juan Manuel López (Champion vs. Champion). But on the same day, after the match (despite of the outcome) , he will lay down his belt, and Montiel will become the full champion. Just talked to the WBO. claudevsq (talk) 14:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

The full title is vacant, Montiel is still the interim champion for some reason.[3] A "full" champion won't be determined until Montiel and Morel fight. - Caribbean~H.Q. 07:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

No, I've read that article too, and after, I phoned the WBO to know. Montiel is the full champion and will face Eric Morel on June 27th. Penalosa will be re-rated at 118 lbs. by the WBO and could well take on the winner... claudevsq (talk) 09:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, the issue is lousy wording then. But you can never be sure with the ABCs, if you take a look at the WBO Latino light heavyweight rankings you will know what I mean. They have like six guys that are in other divisions and two that haven't fought since 2007 in the top ten. - Caribbean~H.Q. 10:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean, but as for boxingscene, this is not the first time they are wrong... Call the WBO under +17877654444 and ask yourself, if you want... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 11:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

See here: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=19896 Plus, the WBO confirmed me again yesterday that Montiel will be listed as full champion on the next monthly update of their rankings. claudevsq (talk) 08:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

The WBO just updated their rankings, everybody can see now that Montiel is well the full champion... He'll defend against #1-rated Morel, and the WBO now has Penalosa rated #2 and Z Gorres #3. claudevsq (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Admit when you are wrong, claudevsq.

The last paragraph is sure to interest you and your phoney and, frankly, downright frivolous claims.

http://www.setanta.com/uk/Articles/other-sports/2009/04/09/Boxing-Afolabi-on-next-fight/gnid-47982/

I advise you call the WBO, as you claim to do regularly, and ask them what nationality one of their champions is if you need further proof. I can smell your rather large serving of humble pie from here! Mmmm! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.110.42 (talk) 19:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Listen, when I claim the WBO told me something, it is the case. But I never said that Afolabi is American, nor did I ask the WBO about that because they obviously class him as Great Britain in their champions' list (which has been updated yesterday, by the way). No, the reason why the american flag is displayed is simply because BoxRec rates him as American, because he lives in California and has fought 17 of his 18 pro fights in the United States. We simply cannot put two flags for every boxer, that could cost us the "Featured Article" status. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but Caribbean H.Q. is. Please talk to him, and if he gives his OK, it shall be... claudevsq (talk) 13:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

The title and tone of this section are getting personal. Let's try to stick to the issue. Administrators are not arbitrators. Their opinions are no more important that anyone elses. See WP:ADMIN for their their role. If someone wants to try to develop a consensus policy on which, or how many flags to use, do it.

I think the WBO site and the Setanta article are reliable enough references to use the UK flag.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

You think? Well, me too, but see how many people opposed to the use of the german flag for Abraham although the IBF lists him as german. I simply want to use BoxRec as a guideline for ALL boxers if possible, because there isn't any other such reference. Hence, we can't put the flags we want for each boxer. If Klitschko had chinese grandparents, we wouldn't list him as Chinese... claudevsq (talk) 04:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think BoxRec lists nationality. I only see rating country, residence and birth place.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Vic Darchinyan

How come Vic Darchinyan is in this list, where it tells in his profile that he is now former champion?--NovaSkola (talk) 03:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know who wrote that into his profile, but for the moment, he still has got his three titles. As he lost, he will now have to face his mandatories or give up his titles or get stripped. The IBF announced already that now, after his loss, if he wants to keep his superfly belt, he has to face South-African Simphiwe Nongqayi next. Even if he had won, he would have had a few days to chose which weight class he wanted to be champion in... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 16:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Format discrepancies

While this point is trivial and will not affect the list in any significant manner, I do believe that we need to make sure that the weight names here match the title of their respective articles, i.e. Super lightweight ↔ Light welterweight et al. Users that are reading these articles for fun/information/boredom and are unfamiliar with the concepts may become confused, even tough the names are used interchangeably. - Caribbean~H.Q. 08:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Not having a go at claude but I did address this issue with this edit but Claude didnt seem to agree with it.--Vintagekits (talk) 08:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Vintagekits NOT to put the IBO champs into the same list as the "major" sanctioning bodies. claudevsq (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, now I see. You're talking about the weight. I always raised the point that there's a separate list listing all the names of the different weight classes... Don't forget, there are weight classes with 3 different names... claudevsq (talk) 18:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, I thought about it again, VK and Carib, I will do it and we'll see how it looks. The WBA and WBC use the same names for their weight classes bar one, as is the case for the IBF, WBO and Ring Magazine. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is the IBO not listed?

I understand the IBO isn't one of the major four but nor is The Ring. So why isn't the IBO listed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.195.205 (talk) 19:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I think there's a discussion about that in the archives, but we decided not to list them with the other four. The IBO is still listed separately... claudevsq (talk) 21:40, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Mikkel Kessler

Two days ago, the WBA elevated Mikkel Kessler to "Super Champion" status, leaving the regular world title vacant. This move may be somehow logical because, during the "Super Six" tournament, sooner or later, one fighter will have both the WBA and WBC belts. Rankings: http://wbanews.com/artman/uploads/1/Official_ratings_as_of_August_September_2009.pdf claudevsq (talk) 13:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

The WBC Diamond Belt

Like we didn't have enough with the "regular", "interim", "WBO super", "WBA super", "in recess", "inactive" and "lineal" recognitions, the WBC just came up with a new belt that will presumably be defended in catchweights as well, the "WBC Diamond Belt". I'm curious how we should add these belts to the current format, my suggestion would be to add a footnote next to the winner, but we may have a problem if the winner doesn't hold any other major title. Let's get the suggestions rolling and please notice that our first lab will be Pacquiao-Cotto at 145 pounds. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

You're right, just like we didn't have enough... my suggestion is the following: let's wait for the first "diamond" champion to be crowned, and then, we'll see. Maybe we could just list them as we list the "emeritus" champions, something in that way... the list is already overloaded, so, another footnote, I don't really know, Caribbean... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 17:56, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

See here: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=21615 On November 14, Cotto's WBO belt and the newly-created "Diamond"-belt of the WBC will be at stake against Pacquiao. claudevsq (talk) 16:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

What a bother. Any news if Maywether-Marquez gets the bling as well? - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Good question! I don't know, I guess we'll wait and see... claudevsq (talk) 06:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I would ignore it to be honest.--Vintagekits (talk) 09:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's some more information about it: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=21657 I think we can't completely ignore it, especially if it will be a belt that will have to be defended, but let's wait and see... claudevsq (talk) 17:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, we have five days remaining until the fight, let's revisit this based on what we know now. - Caribbean~H.Q. 09:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I really wonder if that "Diamond Belt" will have to be defended or not... claudevsq (talk) 20:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't have the particular reference with me, but I recall a report where they mentioned that the winner keeps it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

That's fine with me, that way, we don't have to add it to the table. We will only mention it just like we mention the Emeritus Champions... claudevsq (talk) 13:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Its fine by me, but I think that we should use "created" instead of "inaugurated" in the first line. That way we can use "The inaugural champion was..." after the fight. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Good idea! I've changed it... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 14:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Manny Pacquiao vs. Miguel Ángel Cotto

Next Saturday, 2009/11/14, when Manny Pacquiao and Miguel Ángel Cotto will face each other at the MGM Grand for Cotto's WBO and the vacant WBC Diamond welterweight titles, Pacquiao will probably be rated at Welterweight AND Junior welterweight by The Ring Magazine if he wins. In any case, Pacquiao will keep his Ring Magazine Junior welterweight title until we see next year what turn his career will take... The IBO will give him 60 days as well to chose which titles he wants to keep should he beat Miguel. If Cotto wins, he will be the new pound-for-pound king. Plus, the winner will become the WBO "Super Champion". See: http://www.ringtv.com/blog/1300/ring_ratings_update_looking_ahead_to_pacquiaocotto/ and http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=23390 claudevsq (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

There is a notable technicsm. The author states that Cotto's rank will be determined based on his performance, so they may push Mayweather to the first spot if he wins by a close decision, the only plausible way that he gets the first spot himself is by winning in a very dominant manner (early KO, TKO). If Pacquiao squeaks by, he will get the same treatment. I'm not sure how this will affect the ranking that Pacquiao gets at the WW limit if he wins, but if Cotto does in the aforementioned manner, we will get either: 1-Mayweather 2-Cotto 3-Mosley or (more unlikely) 1-Cotto 2-Mayweather 3-Mosley. Either way the one losing if Cotto wins will be Shane Mosley. Taking all of this under consideration, we must not move him up in the pound-for-pound or divisional tables until The Ring does so. - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Correct! “Should Pacquiao prevail in a clear-cut manner, he will retain his No. 1 spot at the top of the THE RING’s pound-for-pound list. Regardless of the outcome, Pacquiao would still hold THE RING junior welterweight championship, as the Cotto match is being fought in the welterweight division. Pacquiao’s future as the 140-pound champion will be determined by the career course he takes in the future. If he is victorious against Cotto, it is conceivable that he will be ranked in both the junior welterweight and welterweight divisions for the time being. “Should Cotto win, he will be elevated in the pound-for-pound ratings,” Collins continued. “Exactly how far he climbs would depend on the quality of his performance. The same could be said about advancing from the No. 3 spot he currently holds in THE RING’s welterweight rankings.” claudevsq (talk) 12:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Edwin Valero now "champion in recess"

UPDATE: Soto vs TBA for Valero's WBC belt

The WBC lightweight championship is now vacant. Reigning world champion Edwin Valero (27-0, 27 KOs) has been designated as a “champion in recess,” due to a severe cut on his forehead which will keep him out of the ring for some time, as well as Valero’s desire to test the waters in the super lightweight division. WBC President Jose Sulaiman said today, “The WBC is hereby naming Edwin Valero champion in recess for him to be allowed the necessary time to recover from the injury, and to make his decision regarding the division where he will continue his career.”

In the meantime, to not freeze the title, the WBC will determine an opponent for Humberto Soto, who will fight for the 135lb green belt after a vote by the WBC Board of Governors is held.

Tomasz Adamek will vacate Ring's title

From the article: http://www.ringtv.com/blog/1624/ring_ratings_update_adamek_vacates_pacquiao_holds_on_to_ring_title/

Tomasz Adamek has decided to relinquish the Ring's cruiserweight title. "The RING magazine cruiserweight champion Tomasz Adamek has informed us that he will be relinquishing the title in the very near future in order to continue his heavyweight campaign. As soon as the announcement becomes formal, the title will become vacant." claudevsq (talk) 16:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Edwin Valero

Its possible that the backlash from Valero's apparent murder of his wife will hit this list soon. Also, we should expect comments from the WBC shortly, he will most likely be stripped. - Caribbean~H.Q. 16:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I just read the shocking news on fightnews. If Valero really stabbed his wife, which seems likely, of course, he will go to prison for at least 20 years, I suppose, and I don't doubt that, like Caribbean said, the WBC will strip him as soon as there will be evidence of proof for Valero to be a murder. Simply disgusting... Anybody remembers Chris Benoît in WWE wrestling? He strangulated his wife a few years back and was sentenced to lifetime behind bars... claudevsq (talk) 18:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

EDWIN VALERO IS DEAD!!! He just hanged himself... what a tragedy... from Fightnews:

Police in Caracas, Venezuela have reported that former boxing champion Edwin Valero has killed himself in his jail cell, just hours after he was arrested for his wife’s murder. Early Monday morning, Valero used his own clothes to hang himself in his cell. claudevsq (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

WBC Silver Title Belt and International Silver title

The WBC is pleased to announce and confirm the first WBC WORLD SILVER CHAMPIONSHIP bout, to be held in April in the historic city of Saint-Quentin, Picardie, France, and broadcast on French network television.

The new WBC Silver Belt will be proudly awarded to the winner of the featherweight bout between Saint-Quentin s own Cyril "the Hunter" Thomas (36 (10 KO) - 3 – 4) and the Beninese undefeated prospect Justin “le Malin” Savi (23 (15 KOs ) - 0 - 0).

WBC President José Sulaimán commented, “The inaugural WBC Silver Championship is an extraordinary accolade of the WBC World Silver Championship will create unmatched excitement and a chance for boxers to achieve, winning a title with world recognition. The WBC is delighted to work with the promoters of this bout, Pascal Cordier/Sport Evenements and R2 Image and Events, in this first bout for the World Silver Belt, to be broadcast by their French TV network partner. The WBC wishes the best of luck to both boxers in their quest to become the first ever WBC World Silver Champion.”

“The WBC World Silver Belt will present unique opportunities for boxers from every country around the world, as they ascend to challenge the reigning WBC World Champion to rule their weight division.”

President Sulaimán concluded, “Further, the WBC has always been a leader in the struggle for human equality, including its historic battle against apartheid and other barriers to human opportunity. As with every WBC championship, regardless of race, language, or any other status, this offers boxers from every continent the hope of one day challenging to win this honor: the WBC World Silver Championship.”

The World Boxing Council has created the WBC World Silver Championship Belt with the first fight to be promoted in France by promoter Bernard Roos on April 17th. The WBC Silver Belt has already been made by Mexican craftsmen and it looks very beautiful and prestigious.

This will be a very important title in the WBC in substitution of the Interim World Championship, which has lost credibility as it has been handled in a manner for which it was not created. claudevsq (talk) 10:06, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Get this crud off the list.--Shindjuu (talk) 23:00, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right, they have now already two silver titles on their web page: the silver champion (like Justin Savi at featherweight) and the International Silver Champion (like Hiroyuki Hisataka at Flyweight). The difference is that the Silver Champion receives a belt and becomes official contender, and the International Silver Champion does not... What a mess! claudevsq (talk) 03:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

"At risk" of demotion

Hello. During a review of lists promoted to featured status, this list has been identified as "at risk" of demotion. This means that there are some issues that could be fixed to ensure the list meets current featured list standards. If those issues are not fixed reasonably promptly (i.e. the next ten days), the list will be taken to WP:FLRC to be considered for demotion. Issues that need to be fixed, as a minimum, are as follows:

1. Lead is way to short and starts with "This is a list..." which has been deprecated for quite some time.
2. No images available?
3. It's unclear what reference is verifying what champion.
4. Consider merging the tables into one big one, with an additional column to take into account the class instead of 17 sub-headings.
5. "wins-losses-draws-no contests (knockout wins)." not true, some have no draws and some have no "no contests" so this isn't clear.
6. En-dashes should be used (per WP:DASH) to separate the numbers in each record.
7. WP:MOSFLAG means we need to include the name of each country with the flag.
8. Is it "Super Champion" or "Super champion"?
9. There's no explanation anywhere as to what an "interim champion" is.
10. Ref 1 is a footnote rather than a reference and should then use a {{citation}} template (or two) rather than the in-line links.
11. Don't mix date formats in the references (per MOS).
12. Some references don't have publisher/accessdate information.
13. Format differences in the references (e.g. The Ring or The Ring?)
14. Bottom six references are more like "General" references (so could go in their own section) or "External links".
15. Some link problems per this.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The issue with the footnotes has already been fixed. Let's see for the rest... claudevsq (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean the "Ref 1 is a footnote..."? If so, it hasn't been fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, got you wrong then... Anyway, I don't fully understand why, after those years, the list isn't good enough anymore, I mean, after all, it's a LIST and not an article. There are separate articles about the 4 sanctioning bodies, plus, an article for each boxer in the list, partly with photos... claudevsq (talk) 20:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

As I said, this is about making the list meet current standards for a featured list. It's intended to be helpful to contributors rather than going straight to WP:FLRC. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

My thoughts:

1. Yes. See Lead below.
2. I can't think of any images that would contribute anything useful to this list. If it is a requirement, I guess we could scatter around some photos of champions, belts and sanctioning bodies logos.

   If the list is re-organised into a single big table, then portrait images down the right-hand side would be good. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

3. Yes. These are primarily the organization's ratings (found at the bottom of page). Any suggestions on how to make this more clear?

   Perhaps a key for the table. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

4. I think it's better the way it is. There a several problems with adding another column.

   Could you explain the "several problems"? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

   The biggest one is that the Table of Contents couldn't be used for navigation without the subsections.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 05:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   There are other ways to allow navigation, see List of Fab 40 number-one singles for example. TOC is just one way, and in fact, this list's TOC is nasty, too long. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   You could have a separate ToC for a single table (like that list), but it's going to be almost as long as the current ToC.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   You can limit the TOC to level 1 only, thus reducing the length considerably, then use an alternative navigation box, e.g. a horizontal one, which would be much more appealing. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   Can you point to an example of this style? It's not clear to me what you have in mind.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   Well, if you merge the tables, you won't need to limit the TOC (looks like {{TOC limit}} doesn't limit to level one headings anyway), but if you look at List of Fab 40 number-one singles, there's an example of a horizontal navigation box which lets a reader step into a single table at the correct entry. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   The weight categories are much longer than the 4-digit years in the Fab 40 list, so I don't see how you could use a horizontal nav box here.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   Yeah, well that's another good reason to incorporate the weight category (the name) into the table. Then you can have the weights in the horizontal nav box. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   I think it's more useful to navigate by the name of the weight category.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   Even so, that would only be two or three lines of a full width nav box. Much preferable to the current situation. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:23, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   I've had a quick experiment with the first three classes merged in my sandbox along with a nav box... The Rambling Man (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   It looks okay, but I still prefer the current format. It might be just because I'm used to it. Adding a column makes it more likely that a name won't fit on one line, particularly for readers without wide screens.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

5. This is the standard way of showing a boxers record. Maybe we can find a more complete description of the format somewhere.

   No, I'm not complaining about the "standard way" but the explanation is simply false, several boxers don't have that record styling. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

6. I don't think the guideline requires en dashes in this situation. I like the look of the em dash better, but it's no big deal either way.

   Fine but not hyphens, which was my original issue. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

   Ooops. I meant I prefer the figure dash (‒), not the em dash.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:54, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

   Preference is okay, the criteria request the list meets WP:MOS. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

   Rambling Man, it looks like you've changed them to en dashes. Is there a reason you don't want to use the the figure dash?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   I'm using the guidance of the WP:MOS, in particular WP:DASH where this kind of thing falls under the "To stand for to or versus (male–female ratio, 4–3 win, Lincoln–Douglas debate, France–Germany border)." example. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

   But it's not standing for to or versus.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

   Yes, it is. Wins vs defeats vs No decisions etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

7. See Flags below.

   Current featured lists meet WP:MOS and that includes WP:MOSFLAG. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

8. The sources seem to capitalize "Super Champion."
9. Yes. I'll try to write something on interim championships.
10. Yes. See Lead below.
11. Yes. Use a consistent date format.
12. I don't see any missing publishers. Accessdate isn't required, but should be added if the publication date is unknown and it can be useful when dealing with link rot.

    E.g. Ref 13 has no title, no accessdate, no publisher, no work, nothing. All references (including dead ones) should be revisited and citations updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

    Thanks. I missed it because it had no cite template at all. I fixed it. I think that was the only one.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

13. Yes. Is there anything other than italics on The Ring?
14. See #3 above.
15. The broken links should be fixed or tagged.

    I don't need to tag the broken links, to keep it featured, use the link I gave to actually fix the broken/dead links. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Lead

It should be expanded. The footnote "The official rules and regulations of the WBA, IBF, and WBO all mention by name ..." can be incorporated into the lead. Any other ideas on what should be in there?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd say you could incorporate some history of the various federations, the first champions, the current champions, champions that are notable for other reasons (e.g. Manny Pacquiao). The Rambling Man (talk) 22:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

In response to these comments I rewrote the lead. There have been assessments from two editors since then and they still don't think it meets featured standards. There are some referencing issues (as there are throughout the list).

Suggestions from the review:

1. Synopsise the concept of world champion
2. Merge the subsections on the 5 organisations into the lead
3. Discuss some of the more notable champions.

Any other ideas or thoughts on these before I give it another try?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

In relation to suggestion number 3, since this is not an historical list, I think the discussion should be restricted to current champions.

No reason not to discuss current champions then. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Someone has removed the photos from the lead and the rest of the article. It should have, at least, a photo of a championship belt.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:53, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Flags

Many featured articles ignore this MoS guideline (ex. all football club articles that use the Template:Football squad player).--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Irrelevant I'm afraid, and this why it's part of the review. The list must meet WP:MOS. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

The guideline says it will have occasional exceptions. We have to decide if we want to try to make this an exception.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

This should not be an exception. How does a non-expert know what a Ukraine flag looks like? The Rambling Man (talk) 23:04, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

A web browser will display "Ukraine" (and link to Ukraine) from the flag icon image, and a screen reader will say "Ukraine" when it renders the image. That part of the MoS was written before these accessibility improvements were implemented (or even possible) in the flag template system, so should we perhaps reconsider that? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:14, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

"accompany flags with country names" if you don't like the MOS then change the MOS. Right now, featured lists should comply with the MOS including flags. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Um, yeah. "perhaps we should reconsider that" means "shall we discuss changing the MoS". Thanks for your thoughtful response to my invitation for discussion. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:30, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

My apologies but the featured list criteria now include compliance with MOS. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:35, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd support that change to MOS:FLAG.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, well please take that argument to the WP:MOS. Right now, the current use of flags contravenes the MOS which means it contravenes the criteria for what makes a featured list. It's very simple. The Rambling Man (talk) 00:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

OK. claudevsq (talk) 09:20, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Now, the country's names are visible. claudevsq (talk) 17:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

A definite improvement. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Sanctioning bodies subsections

At Wikipedia:Featured_list_removal_candidates/List_of_current_world_boxing_champions/archive1 there was a suggestion to expand these sections with more about the formation of the organisations. It was also suggested that the sections could be eliminated and some of the material moved to the lead.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Nonito Donaire

It is clearly stated in the given references that the Nationality of Donaire is Filipino. This page follow the format of BoxRec.com where it shows the boxer's nationality by their place of birth. In fact Donaire is of Filipino descent. Donaire and his family only acquired US citizenship because they moved to US and became resident of CA, USA. Like other boxers Jean Pascal, Antonio Margarito, Giovanni Segura and Vic Darchinyan, this page put the flag of their place of birth under their names instead of their residence. Doughn (talk • contribs) 08:40, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean by "Lots of boxers ... use the flag of their place of birth instead of their residence."?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The flag under Nonito Donaire in this page should be changed to Philippine flag not just for the fact that he was born in Bohol, Philppines but also because he has a Filipino blood. He only acquired permanent residency in the United States. The Ring has already updated its pound for pound list where Donaire's country was changed to Philippines instead of his residence in California, USA. The BoxRec.com, the reference that was used in this page, also use Philippine flag/Filipino for Donaire's nationality. Doughn (talk • contribs) 10:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

When you write ""Lots of boxers ... use the flag of their place of birth instead of their residence." what do you mean by use?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:04, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Does the IBF use the title Unified champion?

The table is listing Wladimir Klitschko as IBF Unified champion. I've never seen the IBF use this. What is the source?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

That's right, but he's a "Unified champion" in the therms of the word simply because he unified the IBF and WBO championships (as well as IBO and Ring Magazine belts). As all other champions in the list who have got 2 titles are called "Unified", we should not spar Klitschko. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 22:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe we can find another way to indicate champions who have unified some of the championships, but doing it that way is misleading. Unless the IBF calls him their unified champion (as the WBO calls him their Super Champion, for example) it shouldn't be in the IBF box.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

It looks like there is the same issue with the WBC for Bradley and Donaire. The WBC doesn't use the the term "Unified champion" either.

Márquez is the WBA Super champion, yet he's listed here as the Unified champion. Claude wrote about Márquez:

“ No, he's unified champion, like all others who have got 2 titles. I know the WBA rankings... He'd be WBA Super champion if he had got only the WBA title... ”

in this edit summary. Regardless of what we decide about identifying boxers who have unified some of the championships, it should be in addition to, not instead of the titles the sanctioning bodies award.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The WBA's March Ratings have been released [4] and Juan Manuel Marquez is still their Lightweight Super Champion.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Your request for a Third Opinion in regard to this dispute has been removed as stale, having been on the request list for more than six days. Please feel free to re-list your dispute if you still would like to obtain an opinion, but if no Third Opinion Wikipedian has chosen to issue an opinion by now, you would probably be better off moving on to a listing at the content noticeboard, making a request for comments, or adopting some other form of dispute resolution. Regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

From this discussion (Super champion and Unified champion) at WikiProject Boxing there is consensus that the term Undisputed Champion should only be used if the boxer holds all the major belts. Since Wladimir Klitschko, Timothy Bradley, Juan Manuel Márquez and Nonito Donaire do not hold all the major belts I am removing this term from their entries in the table.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Brandon Ríos

Brandon has both nationalities: US American and Mexican. However even when born in USA he enters the ring with the Mexican flag and is oficially listed as Mexican by the WBO as you can see here, so that is why his fag should be Mexican. http://wbanews.com/artman/publish/ratingRankings/WBA_Official_Ratings_as_of_August_2011.shtml Daalo194 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.225.184.116 (talk) 00:05, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Brandon Rios was stripped of his WBA title

Rios failed to make the 135lb weight limit therefore was stripped from his WBA "regular" title. The fight will still go on, the title will remain vacant of Rios wins. If John Murray wins he claims it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.76.54.218 (talk) 02:47, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Danny García

I'm going to add the Puerto Rican flag next to the US'. García, son of two native Puerto Ricans, has publicly identified as Puerto Rican. Before his fight with Erik Morales he stated that he would be representing both Puerto Rico and his native Philladelphia. Even before that, he said that he would be the "next great Puerto Rican boxer", which is sourced in his biography. I have no interest in removing the US' flag, just avoid removing the Puerto Rican flag as some IP users have been doing in his article and Morales'. El Alternativo (talk) 05:25, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Not to create confusion, we should stick with BoxRec's nationalities... Danny García was born and lives in Philadelphia, PA. What if he identified himself as Jamaican, just for example? No, this has to be based, and as he was born in USA AND lives there, you could put both flags in the list of current WBC boxing world champions, but not this one, please... Bute will be awarded the Canadian citizenship tomorrow, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we should change the flag... Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 09:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

But BoxRec doesnt have a 'nationality' field.--Wonkey Donkey (talk) 20:31, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

In that case, is there a real reason to actually have falgs? Besides patriotsim and WP:FLAGCRUFT it seems better to try another approach since from the looks of it, Mexican-Americans have the same issue. El Alternativo (talk) 21:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

WBA	WBC	IBF	WBO	The Ring
Lamont Peterson Super champion American 30–1–1–0 (15) December 10, 2011	Danny García Puerto Rican-American 23–0–0–0 (14) March 24, 2012	Lamont Peterson American 30–1–1–0 (15) December 10, 2011	Timothy Bradley American 28–0–0–1 (12) April 4, 2009	vacant
Marcos René Maidana Argentinian 31–3–0–0 (28) July 23, 2011	José Cuervo Mexican-American 8–0–0 (0) July 26, 2011
Johan Pérez Interim champion Venezuelan 15–0–1–1 (12) December 10, 2011

Maybe the table above can serve as a model? It is not as pretty, but listing them this way avoids confusion, conflict and is more practical. "Puerto Rico", "Mexico" or "United States" are countries, not nationalities. Then there is the fact that Boxrec is also user edited, which in Wikipedia are generally regardded as bad sources, such as the IMDB being allowed al a link, but not a reference. El Alternativo (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem? I will do the change if there isn't. El Alternativo (talk) 07:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I would not change it. As you can see on this side, we had a long discussion over the fact that the list is not a "Featured list" anymore... If you ever want it to become a candidate again in the future, instead of replacing flags, I would rather try to upload a photo or two... How about a photo of the WBC's Diamond belt, which will be at stake on May 5th between Mayweather Jr and Cotto? What do you and others think? claudevsq (talk) 18:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Pictures of Belts

Will anybody be able to find fair use pictures of the following:

• WBA Champion
• WBA Super Champion
• WBC Champion
• WBC Diamond Champion
• IBF Champion
• WBO Champion
• WBO Super Champion (WorldSeriesOfPoker500 (talk) 03:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC))

I inserted a picture of the WBC Diamond belt into the article (WBC section), but somebody found it useful to delete it... claudevsq (talk) 18:42, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

WBC Silver Champions

How exactly are these judged? I expected the silver champions to be considered similar to interim champions, given that they are often promoted to first contender after winning it, but I do not see them listed here at all. The belt also reads "world champion", which also seems to support some sort of interim status. 24.139.224.111 (talk) 00:47, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes and no, because, as you can see, the WBC has got two interim champions at the moment, and as for the Silver world champions, which have more or less the same status as International champions (male and female), meanwhile, there are also International Silver, Baltic Silver, Youth Silver, USNBC Silver titles... claudevsq (talk) 19:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Naming conventions

As per an ongoing, unproductive and one-sided discussion about how boxers with international names should be presented in this article, I'd like some others' opinions on how we should go about it, before I seek a third opinion (however that's supposed to work..)

• User:Claudevsq has stated that he is "with Ring Mag's Ratings Panel and BoxRec editor", which is a bit unclear to me due to his non-native command of English. Does that mean he works for The Ring magazine and BoxRec? Some clarification from him would be useful, but it is unlikely I'll get one, as he prefers to communicate with me solely via edit summaries, whilst happily engaging with others on this very talk page. *sniff*

• My main issue pertains as to which organisations' spelling conventions we use. Observe the commas and periods for this boxer: Floyd Mayweather, Jr. (Wikipedia); Floyd Mayweather Jr (BoxRec); Floyd Mayweather Jr. (The Ring). Note the inconsistency. Therefore, since this is a Wikipedia article unaffiliated with BoxRec and The Ring, I propose that we stick rigidly to the way in which Wikipedia makes use of the "Jr." suffix: Roy Jones, Jr.; Chris Eubank, Jr.; Julio César Chávez, Jr.; Wilfredo Vázquez, Jr.; etc. To me that's logical, but User:Claudevsq seems to disagree (and is reluctant to discuss it outside of edit summaries). I've twice attempted to make these changes to the article—1, 2—but he has simply reverted them both times without any further discussion.

• What is even more confusing is that the article stays highly consistent when it comes to special characters: Krzysztof Włodarczyk; Saúl Álvarez; Juan Manuel Márquez; Juan Manuel López; etc., but User:Claudevsq makes the claim that "dots like in "Jr." disturb the system". Therefore if "Jr." disturbs some unexplained system, what about the various special characters in which neither BoxRec nor The Ring are consistent? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:15, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • That simply means that I "work" during my freetime, just like as a Wikipedia editor. Let's hear from others concerning the names... claudevsq (talk) 10:30, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

WBC Diamond Champions

The list doesn't include the Diamond Champions. Should we start listing them?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 02:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

We already list the five male and two female diamond champions, the male ones in the article under "World Boxing Council". But I don't think we should include them into the list as it is more of a honorary title... Aren't there already enough champions in the list, quite frankly?!? claudevsq (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree. If we're not listing them here, we should remove the material about Diamond Champions from the WBC section.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 03:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I see the same situation with their emeritus champions. They are not part of this list, so there is no reason to mention them here. It is relevant to the WBC article so I'll move it there.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:58, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

IBO

Why not expand the list of federations, adding the Champions version IBO? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.222.219.167 (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

-Because the IBO is a Minor title this for all 4 Major title plus Ring Magazine (WorldSeriesOfPoker500 (talk) 01:42, 4 January 2013 (UTC))

You appear to be getting information from the media. The same media who sends out writers to cover boxing once in a blue moon. Many of the writers do not even know the difference between the mandatory 8 count that every downed boxer gets and a standing 8 count. Then standing 8 count is almost never used anywhere anymore. The IBO should be counted. The don't have multiple champions like the WBA who, when one of their champs wins another belt, calls them a SUPER CHAMPION and has another title bout in the same weight class for that same title. Thus having two champions of the same weight class only for the extra cash of the sanctioning fees. The IBO uses PC rankings and is run out of the USA vs. the W groups that are in Mexico, South America and Puerto Rico. All who are allowed to do as they please. The IBO has been around since the mid 90's and has some good champions. None of the groups may be considered great or ideal for boxing, but, The IBO and the IBF are clearly better this past 5 years becasue they have the U.S. state officials looking over them and the ABC. So, bottom line the IBO is a main title. Just because the WBA and WBC were started earlier does not make them more important. The WBO willing to deal with promoters snuck into the action but are very similar to the BC and BA. Again the IBO and IBF are actually the better of the five. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.36.176.138 (talk) 00:19, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with your criticism of the WBA, but that doesn't really help your case for the IBO. Can you provide some reliable sources that consider the IBO to be of the same status as these sanctioning bodies?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 09:18, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Featured list status

Would anybody be interested in helping me to get the FL-status for this list? We had the "Featured Article" status until a few years ago, but then, it was revoked. Meanwhile, we have done about everything, except putting in a photo or two. But for FL-status, it should be enough... What do you think? claudevsq (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I would help out with that. The big issue when it was revoked was references for the titles.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:27, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, right... hmm, quite honestly, I think I will revoke the idea of FL-status as well if it's too complicated... I thought it was less difficult to get FL than to get FA. claudevsq (talk) 07:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Date of Ricky Burns' WBO lightweight championship

Please stop the edit war. Discuss the issue here and try to reach a consensus.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• OK: We were not even sure last year if Burns' March 10 fight against Paulus Moses was going to be for the interim title or for the regular title. Only in the WBO's March rankings, which came out about March 12, he was the regular champion. That means he has been elevated, but one month before- rankings of mid-February, with results up to, let's say, February 10, he was still the interim champion, and the regular title was vacant. It's a pity that the ORIGINAL rankings are not available anymore, because Burns HAS NOT been elevated the same day Márquez was stripped. If that was the case, I would have put in the date of January 26 last year, and not March 10. claudevsq (talk) 07:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Look, I'm trying to make this as accurate as possible and I am sure it was for the regular title; I was there. He was installed as full WBO lightweight champion on January 26 when Marquez was stripped. I'll try find a few newspaper articles from last year but in the meantime, let's leave it as the actual date that he became WBO lightweight champion. Wowsssowss (talk) 04:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm updating this list for over 5 years now, day-in and day-out, am in regular contact with the WBO... as I said before, if it would have been January 26, I wouldn't have put in March 10. Fight vs. Moses WAS for regular title, yes, but he's been elevated shortly before, not the day Márquez was stripped. claudevsq (talk) 09:38, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I was just reading the history, and on February 6, 2012, I spoke to Miss Diana Meléndez from the WBO (see history), and she told me that they did NOT strip Márquez, it was an error in the ratings, and the ratings were changed back. Now that I read this when looking up the history of the page, I remember... Believe me, I'm doing everything to keep this list as correct as possible. claudevsq (talk) 14:05, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

HERE'S THE OFFICIAL WBO PROOF THAT MARQUEZ WAS STILL THEIR LIGHTWEIGHT SUPER CHAMPION ON MARCH 1st, 2012:

http://www.wboboxing.com/here-is-our-february-2012-rankings-2/

As for Burns missing the words "Interim" on these corrected February rankings which came out March 1st, 2012, we all know that, just like Klitschko, Márquez and Narváez for the moment, the WBO has NEVER, EVER had a "Super" champion and a "regular" champion at the same time. If Márquez was still the champ, Burns was the interim champ, no matter if Márquez was Super or not Super. WBA yes, but WBO NEVER ONCE in their history. Lots of newspapers reported that Márquez was stripped on January 26, but that was not the case as you can finally see now officially from the WBO's original rankings... WBA stripped him, yes, but WBO did way later, a month or two later... claudevsq (talk) 14:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I'll admit it; perhaps I had it wrong but one thing we can all agree on is that Burns' fight against Moses on March 10 was DEFINITELY not for the interim title and was DEFINITELY for the regular title. With this in mind, why have you changed Burns' date of installation as WBO lightweight champion to March 10? We know it wasn't on March 10 and, as suggested by the source you just left, it has to be between the 1st and 10th of March. Why don't you speak to Miss Diana Melendez again and ask her when Burns was installed as full WBO lightweight champion? Wowsssowss (talk) 00:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Are these few days THAT important? I think it was because the March 2012 ratings came out on March 10 or were including results with up to March 10. The fight was for the full title, and I could try to speak to her, but I doubt she'll remember... I'll try though when I'll have the time... N.B.: Next time, when you are wrong, don't call me stupid little bender, please... Thanks. After all, we are all civilized people, no? ;-) claudevsq (talk) 06:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, they are. This article lists information about current world champions such as name, nationality and date of winning their championship(s). I'll stress that last point; date of winning the championship (or in this case, installment as full champion), not when "claudevsq" thinks or prefers but the date of winning the championship. That's also quite convenient how you'll try to speak to her when you "have the time" and that you "doubt she'll remember". N.B.: You, by conclusion of what you have just written, are wrong so nah. I never once said I was civilised so I implore, no, directly ask, you to point out where I said I was civilised. Wowsssowss (talk) 00:27, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I have PROVEN that Burns was still the interim champion on March 1st, and that's all I am going to say. I'm fed up with you. I HAVE proven you wrong with your date of January 26, and you still try to convince me about I don't know what. You say yourself you aren't civilised (see: WP:CIVIL), so why still talking to you anyway? claudevsq (talk) 06:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I have just got an answer by Miss Meléndez, telling me because of spring break, she is going to send me the information next Monday! claudevsq (talk) 15:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely spiffing! Also, you aren't right either pal, so less of your shite. We'll see who's wrong when this bird gets back to you. Wowsssowss (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC) Actually, I never said I wasn't civilised, I just said I didn't say I was civilised so you're wrong again. Wowsssowss (talk) 21:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Official answer from WBO: March 12, 2012. I will gladly forward the official WBO e-mail to everyone who lets his e-mail address here.

For the others, here the original answer from Miss Diana Meléndez, WBO executive:

Mr. Vesque:

Ricky Burns became full champion on April 12, 2012.

Diana Melendez

So... are you happy now? claudevsq (talk) 16:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I replied her if it was really sure, and yes (quote): Yes, remember Juan Manuel Marquez was the champion and he moved to the 140 lbs. claudevsq (talk) 07:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

To be completely honest, I don't know if that's actually a WBO official. How do I know you haven't made up some e-mail address and sent it to yourself? Nonetheless, for the sake of no longer possessing the will to amend incorrect articles, I shall leave it be. I hope you're happy with an incorrect article. Wowsssowss (talk) 00:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

In fact, I'm not. Why don't you go to official WBO site and contact them yourselves? I know Ms. Meléndez and Miss Companys for years... claudevsq (talk) 07:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

No one but Claude and Ms. Meléndez know that. That's one reason why this is considered original research and is not allowed to support material in Wikipedia by the policy WP:NOR.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 18:38, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Listen, as it is impossible to find something written about the exact date, I consider the original e-mails from the WBO as legit. Or shall we leave the date blank?!? As I just said, I can provide the original e-mails, or everybody can himself go to www.wboboxing.com and see under "Contact". claudevsq (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

OK, no original research, here's finally proof that Burns had been elevated for March 10, so... http://www.wboboxing.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/WBO-Ranking-as-of-Mar.-2012.pdf claudevsq (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Remove Ring Title

There was debate a while back about if the Ring title should be included in this list and a 'wait and see' attitude seemed to be the agreed upon course of action (see this discussion). Now that the Ring has changed its criteria, that criteria and the title itself has lost substantial credibility.[5][6][7] In essence, the fears from the previous conversation seem to have come true (i.e., the title has been mismanaged and no longer has credibility). I think its time the Ring title be removed from the list and the big four recognized by the International Boxing Hall of Fame be the only titles listed. What do people think?-- RonSigPi (talk) 03:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, I have to say you have a good point here. I won't say more to this subject, simply because of the fact, when I "took over" rhis list from mod east718 5 or 6 years ago, there already were the big 4 and The Ring champs, and I didn't want a change if not absolutely necessary... claudevsq (talk) 07:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree that The Ring titles have lost some credibility with the recent changes, but they still have more credibility than any of the "big four." The Ring titles should stay on this list.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:09, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Spelling of names, again

Since this issue never came close to being resolved earlier in the year, I took the initiative and tried my luck again this week to see if my edits would stick. Predictably, that proved futile. Unless other users would like to lend a helping hand in advising either myself or User:Claudevsq on how to resolve this without edit warring, I will gladly keep on changing the spelling of Floyd Mayweather, Jr. (comma and period included, per the article itself and standard U.S. naming conventions) and Sergio Martínez (middle name no longer included) to reflect that of their respective articles. Beyond claiming that he "works" for the WBO ("I'm updating this list for over 5 years now, day-in and day-out, am in regular contact with the WBO"), User:Claudevsq should realise that such claims do not fly here and that despite being a primary contributor, he is effectively claiming ownership of this article by not allowing others' edits to remain. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:01, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

And just to demonstrate as clearly as possible to anyone observing, here is a list of diffs from pretty much every time User:Claudevsq has reverted an edit by me, since September 2012, whether due to language or naming corrections that he inexplicably disagreed with: [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] Does that not smack of claiming ownership? Also, since he has now reverted my edits twice in the space of a few hours with explanation, he's also edit warring. Surely nobody who has that much free time on their hands to single-handedly manage a large article can be that reluctant to just talk things out, or even provide an edit summary? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

And again today, everything changed back with no explanation given. Anyone else want to try communicating with him? I must be giving off virtual body odour or something because I'm getting nowhere, neither here nor on his talk page. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Same again today, and he still refuses to discuss anything via talk pages. Interestingly, a look at his own talk page shows that he has a history of being difficult with other users and a reluctance to accept changes made to 'his' articles: 1, 2, 3, 4. In many of those cases, based on his interactions (or lack thereof) with user users, he doesn't seem to have a clue what he's doing half the time, or insists on following some made-up rules which have nothing to do with WP. For someone who displays a so-called Veteran Editor badge on his userpage, he's certainly not behaving like one. To quote User:Vintagekits on that page: ''Claude usually isnt the best when it comes to discussing issue with people who dont exactly agree with everything he says." How very true. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:04, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Today's revert by our confused buddy User:Claudevsq, silent as usual and without a clue as to what he's doing. Let it be known that he once told me that "accents affect BoxRec's system", yet he insists on there being an accent for Oscar De La Hoya! Seriously, it's laughable at this point. I've been in some silly edit wars in my time, but never have I seen a user make up such contradictory 'rules' as he goes along. It's like he's plucking them straight out of his ass something. And let us not ignore all the other names in the current edition of the article which have accents aplenty—Yoan Pablo Hernández, Sergio Martínez, Juan Manuel Márquez, Danny García, etc. Please enlighten us, User:Claudevsq. What system are they interfering with? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

User:Claudevsq, please start discussing your reverts, or I'm afraid your ability to edit this and other pages will become seriously limited. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Dates of Super champions

Beibut Shumenov: Became regular champion on January 29, 2010, was elevated to Super on October 8, 2013. Chris John: Became interim champion on September 26, 2003, defended (vacant?) regular title on June 4, 2004, defended Super title September 19, 2009 for first time. Guillermo Rigondeaux: Won interim title on November 13, 2010, won regular title on January 20, 2011, became unified champion on April 13, 2013. Anselmo Moreno: Won regular title on May 31, 2008, defended Super title first on June 17, 2011. claudevsq (talk) 14:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Alrighty. Dates and such for these belts are not my forté anyway. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:10, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd prefer the date that they won the title in the ring, but it's not very important.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 23:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Correct. But after all, we still have the "List of WBA world champions", where somebody can put all the different dates deemed important. claudevsq (talk) 13:34, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

WBO recognition

I deleted the part that the WBO title is not recognised. The 2 links are very out of date. The BBC now recognises the WBO title. The sports illustrated link is from 1998! It is a well known fact that the WBO is held in the same esteem as the other 3 titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.116.2 (talk) 18:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I think the IBO is beginning to take the spot where the WBO has been 20 years back from now. claudevsq (talk) 18:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

You have a point, but the Yahoo link was updated this year and still didn't include the WBO. The WBO has built credibility and respect and some of the other sanctioning bodies have lost so much that most people now consider the WBO to be on the same level. What do you think of including something about how the WBO was not initially widely recognized, but became so over the years?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 21:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't intend to imply that the WBO didn't have wide recognition before the Japan Boxing Commission included them, just that the JBC was one of the last to do so. Maybe there is a better way to explain this. There is a more complete history in the WBO article.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks for improving! claudevsq (talk) 05:38, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Separate entries for each titleholder in each weight class

I have redone an edit I made a couple of days ago. I was just making a simple formatting change to show Guillermo Rigondeaux listed separately under the "WBO" and "The Ring" columns in the "Super bantamweight" weight class. The same person is listed as champion in adjoining columns in a couple of other weight classes (see the entries for Donnie Nietes under the "WBO" and "The Ring" columns in the "Light flyweight" category, for example). It seemed clearer to me to have the champion listed directly below the corresponding titles (like the Donnie Nietes listings). It seems like it could potentially get confusing if a single person ends up winning multiple championships (such as the "WBC," "IBF," "WBO" and "The Ring" columns) and is only listed once.

I personally wouldn't be too concerned if we went with a single listing spanning multiple columns. However, I think we should be consistent whenever this occurs.

Please let me know if there are any issues with this... I certainly don't want to get in a war of edits if other folks think we should format the listings differently. Thanks. ColdGrayLight (talk) 02:53, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's a long time ago since I insisted on anything concerning this list... ;-) By the way, the difference between Nietes and Rigondeaux is the date... Rigo won both the WBO and Ring Titles on the same date. Back when Takayama both held the IBF and WBO titles at mini flyweight for the second time, he also spanned two columns. But that's OK. claudevsq (talk) 12:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Tyson Fury nationality

Shouldn't the flag used be the Irish tricolor as he self identifies as Irish?--Donniediamond (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Trolls

Hey there are troll in the water. How and where to report this? lots of fake champions.

Fightdane (talk) 03:13, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on List of current world boxing champions. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131026063834/http://wbanews.com:80/artman/publish/wbahistory/index.shtml to http://wbanews.com/artman/publish/wbahistory/index.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130904164038/http://wbanews.com:80/artman/publish/campionshipSuperBeltWinners/index.shtml to http://wbanews.com/artman/publish/campionshipSuperBeltWinners/index.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on List of current world boxing champions. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060424103925/http://www.boxrec.com:80/title_search.php to http://www.boxrec.com/title_search.php
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090601225250/http://wbanews.com:80/artman/publish/ranking/index.shtml to http://wbanews.com/artman/publish/ranking/index.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:10, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

23:57, 3 September 2016 (UTC)47.54.74.50 (talk)

Lineal champions

I guess this needs a consensus.

• Support inclusion of lineal champions as displayed in the current version of the article. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose inclusion of lineal champions as displayed in the current version of the article. claudevsq (talk) 07:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
• Support inclusion of lineal champions, on the condition that "The Ring" champions are removed. "The Ring" titles carry no weight whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.134.130.40 (talk) 12:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

• Haa, that's an interesting one. I have no opinion on it, but I have seen such arguments put forth for a while. Surely they carry more weight than the IBO, at least? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Really... But I would rather support keeping both The Ring and Lineal... Removing The Ring for the sake of keeping lineal makes no sense to me. We had The Ring in this list from the beginning. We should keep it. claudevsq (talk) 07:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Just because they were in this list from the beginning? That seems like a poor reason to keep them around. I think it should just be WBA / WBC / IBF / WBO ... as they are the 4 major recognized world titles that people follow and care about. But I do understand the argument for including lineal champions. I just don't know why there is support for The Ring, it is irrelevant.--47.54.74.50 (talk) 23:57, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't like to see The Ring dropped from the list, simply because of how old it is. Prestige or credibility are another matter, but the fact is that the Ring title has been around longer than two of the four major sanctioning bodies (IBF and WBO). Mac Dreamstate (talk) 14:18, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Update Details

Please add new interim ibf LFLW champ Milan Melindo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.187.17.128 (talk) 13:33, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- Dane2007 ^talk 06:22, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

On boxrec http://boxrec.com/boxer/331008 you can see his last fight was for that interim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.187.17.128 (talk) 13:25, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  15:35, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done – It was a routine addition that needed to be made to the table. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:56, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2017

Change: Martinszeps (talk) 23:48, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Gulumeemee (talk) 11:08, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

````Vacated Lineal Titles

Many of the people listed as lineal champions are no longer lineal champions. All but three of the weight divisions are vacant according to tbrb.org — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theazor99 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of current world boxing champions. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wbcboxing.com/WBCboxing/Portal/cfpages/contentmgr.cfm?docId=123&docTipo=4&orderby=docid&sortby=ASC
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://ibf-usba-boxing.com/history.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20041015134801/http%3A//www.maxboxing.com/Kim/kim092602.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081119150246/http://www.goldenboypromotions.com/media/2007/sept/9.12.07_mag.htm to http://www.goldenboypromotions.com/media/2007/sept/9.12.07_mag.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120507093439/http://queensberry-rules.com/2012-articles/may/the-horrible-new-ring-magazine-championship-policy.html to http://queensberry-rules.com/2012-articles/may/the-horrible-new-ring-magazine-championship-policy.html

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) 06:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of current world boxing champions. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wbcboxing.com/WBCboxing/Portal/cfpages/contentmgr.cfm?docId=123&docTipo=4&orderby=docid&sortby=ASC
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160101230757/http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/172677-the-ring-updates-championship-policy to http://ringtv.craveonline.com/news/172677-the-ring-updates-championship-policy

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) 04:48, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2017

Link flyweight Daigo Higa Fpwlada (talk) 16:37, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

 Done, linked. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2017

I was looking at the WBA rankings page, and they list that the date that Yunier Dorticos became "regular champion" is 6-15-17. According to the same page, Miguel Flores remained WBA "interim champion" after his bout against Guillermo Rigondeaux was changed to a no decision. Also the Thammanoon Ninyomtrong is listed, by boxrec.com, as having a record consisting of 16 wins, no losses and no draws. Morning Dove (talk) 22:52, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Correction:  Done. Ninyomtrong's record has now been updated, and Flores has been re-added to the list as WBA interim champion. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 23:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2017

Edit the current Junior Welterweight belt holders and records. The Grammar Police (talk) 04:02, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Who are the current champions? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 04:08, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Fix please

Under list of current champions, at Light Middleweight, it has Erislandy Lara. It says he's from Cuba and even has the Cuban flag. Lara is American. He defected from Cuba, his nickname is "The American Dream", and Boxrec lists him as American. Boxrec is one, if not the best boxing site around. I can't edit with my phone anymore. Can someone fix it please Myth420 (talk) 13:04, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done – changed flag to USA. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Listing succesful defenses?

I think something along the lines of this would be a very welcome addition to this list.

WBA	WBC	IBF	WBO	The Ring
Anthony Joshua Super champion United Kingdom 19–0–0–0 (19) April 29, 2017 0 defenses	Deontay Wilder United States 38–0–0–0 (37) January 17, 2015 5 defenses	Anthony Joshua United Kingdom 19–0–0–0 (19) April 9, 2016 3 defenses	Joseph Parker New Zealand 23–0–0–0 (18) December 10, 2016 1 defense	Tyson Fury United Kingdom 25–0–0–0 (18) November 28, 2015 0 defenses	vacant

What do you all think? Fpwlada (talk) 15:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Looks rather crowded, with a lot of text info present already. I think defences are better displayed in the list articles. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 23:50, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Update List

Under Anthony Joshua's name it says he is the "Super Champion". Keith Thurman and Terrence Crawford are in the same situation as Joshua, but they do not have the "Super Champion" under their names. Please either remove the "Super Champion" from Joshua or add it to other "Super Champions". I suggest this just for consistency on the list.

Also, Chayaphon Moonsri is now 48-0 according to boxrec.com

Morning Dove (talk) 19:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)Morning Dove October 10, 2017

If it's consistency you're after, then you should take it up with the WBA—they're the ones who still list some champions as "Super" and others not. Since Wikipedia is about accuracy, we need to replicate their terminology until the very last "Super" title has been consolidated. Otherwise we wouldn't be presenting the whole story.

Chayaphon Moonsri's stats have now been updated. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Impasse

I have extended protection as there appears to be no consensus. Please let me know when said impasse has ended, or request unprotection at WP:RFPP. Recommend some form of dispute resolution be undertaken. Cheers, Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:39, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

That's enough!

Full protection! Please do civilly discuss content of this article. Please comport yourselves in a civil manner.Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Gladly. I'll repeat my rationale from the above section: the WBA official site, as of 11 October, has yet to be updated and therefore eliminate some of the leftover "Super" titles (specifically Joshua, Thurman, Crawford, and Corrales). Granted, it may seem obvious that "Super" titles no longer exist in those weight classes due to there only being a single champion, but the WBA has not yet made it official. For the sake of accuracy, we should not take liberties in diverging from their (albeit silly) terminology until they remove the aforementioned "Super" titles from their official material. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

How is it you communicate with other people? Your language is very offensive and not an a civil level. Please refrain from using that type af language. It is not beneficial at all.

Why cant you understand that WBA will NEVER officially retire the term Super Champion, just like the WBO list their champions as super champions. It is a honorary title only.

It makes no sense to use it when there is only 1 champion in the division. You are only cunfussing people. You should know better as a boxing fan.

And again. Please watch your language and how to speak to people.

You're wrong. The WBA has abolished the "Super" title from at least one weight class so far, namely lightweight (Linares). You've also misunderstood the WBO's own "Super" title concept—that is only an honorary "lifetime achievement badge" of sorts, which a boxer can carry up or down weight classes. They can even be named as such if they're not an actual WBO world titleholder—extensive searches on the WBO site (at least a few months ago when it was still working properly) can confirm this. The WBA's "Super"/"Regular" titles don't work in the same way at all. Stupid as it is, they are genuinely 'split' titles. If you want to complain about confusion, complain to the WBA. We can only replicate what they do until their shenanigans are over. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:03, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

And the only one needing to watch their tone on here is you. Aggressiveness practically oozes out of every word you write. Learn some civility yourself. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:03, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Is this guy for real? People like you makes others editors wanna stop being on wikipedia. You think this is your very own Encyclopedia, which it is not. You are not the boss. And get your facts straight. Linares was never a Super champion, there the Super title from the lightweight was NEVER abolished. The WBA Super title is aswell honorary.

http://www.wbaboxing.com/boxing-news/terence-crawford-elevated-to-wba-super-champion#.Wd6S42i0NPY

http://www.boxingscene.com/jason-sosa-vacates-wba-title-ahead-lomachenko-title-shot--113651

@David-golota: Please comment on the content, not the users, also, please sign your talk page comments. It also seems you need to review how to format your comments within a discussion. Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 23:30, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

I just did that Linares was never a Super champion, there the Super title from the lightweight was NEVER abolished. The WBA Super title is aswell honorary.

http://www.wbaboxing.com/boxing-news/terence-crawford-elevated-to-wba-super-champion#.Wd6S42i0NPY

http://www.boxingscene.com/jason-sosa-vacates-wba-title-ahead-lomachenko-title-shot--113651

David-golota (talk) 23:42, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I am a real person and this is a real website where we are really discussing stuff finally. Are you just thick in the head for real? Yet again you're throwing out baseless and ludicrous accusations of ownership. The WBA site still lists the abovementioned boxers as "Super" champions, even after consolidation of the respective "Regular" titles. That's unfortunately their way of doing things, so we have to replicate it here. I'm going by WP:V, not WP:OR or WP:SYNTH which is what you're doing. What do you have to present to the contrary? Nothing. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 16:08, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

And again, I'll point out that you're misunderstanding the term "honorary". Just today, the WBA announced that Ustinov will face Charr for the vacant WBA "Regular" heavyweight title, whilst Joshua remains "Super" champion. Therefore the titles are still distinctly split, and to purposely not mention on this list article that Joshua is not "Super" champion would be highly inaccurate per the official WBA source.

Also, to follow up on what I meant by Linares earlier (whom I never said was "Super" champion), we can observe from the WBA lightweight title history that there hasn't been a "Super" title at that weight since Márquez in 2012, nor a "Regular" champion since Ríos in 2011. So there has indeed only been one WBA champion at lightweight for many years—"Super"/"Regular" having been abolished—but obviously plenty more weight classes to go. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:45, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

You should really watch your langauge. You the need for calling names and using negative terms about other persons. You wont go far in this world with the level of arrogance you have.

Again, this is NOT your own article nor is this your personal website. So dont act like it is.

You dont seem to answer my question. What about Crawford? He was named the super champion despite the WBA saying there will NOT be named any more champions in that divison. Is that not a honorary title then? http://www.wbaboxing.com/boxing-news/terence-crawford-elevated-to-wba-super-champion

And the WBA hasnt announced anything. Get your facts straight. http://www.boxingscene.com/team-oquendo-ustinov-charr-eliminator-not-wba-belt--121346

David-golota (talk) 22:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Buddy, do me a favour and try something for me: address the points I have repeatedly made without dragging this down into a conduct dispute by constantly flinging accusations and articulating yourself with a battleground tone. I guarantee it will improve this discussion and we can make some progress. Over to you now—and I won't respond unless you demonstrate some civility, and stop repeating the same old "This is not your personal article" tripe. I'm not listening to that anymore. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:57, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Why dont you adress my points which I back up with facts. The WBA are making the Super Title honorary. You dont seem to adress that at all. Oh an yeah, you didnt adress your WBA heavyweight title fight either. You said the WBA had made a fight for the WBA title, which I pointed out to you they had not.

Again, read the links I have adressed from the WBA official website. Crawford holds a super title, but it is honorary only. And dont refer to me as buddy or other names. Im not your buddy, friend or any of that. Please keep any personal attack away from this discussion. 19:03, 13 October 2017 (UTC)David-golota (talk)

Your tone still isn't right, so I can't discuss anything with you until you do something about that. Try harder. Calling someone a "buddy" in English is not a personal attack, but a term of endearment, so try again. Address me in a civil tone, without falsely accusing me of anything—personal attacks, page ownership, etc.—and I will discuss this WBA matter with you. If not, we can go to WP:DRN. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:17, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

My tone? Watch your own tone. Your level of arrogance is beyond what I ever thought anybody could have on this site. You refuse to read the links from WBA official website because of my tone? I never called you any names nor have I used offensive word. The same can not be said about you. So you should watch your own tone. Dont get smart with me. We both know that when someone is calling another person while their having an argument it is not ment in a positive or friendly way. So dont even bother to try to smooth it. Stop that. I have official sources from the WBA which clearly states that Crawford is elevated to Super champion. Since you refuse to check my sources, I will give it to you:

Considering Crawford’s achievement, his solidity as Champion at 140 pounds, which make him the best fighter of his weight class, and covered by Article C18 of the WBA Rules, which allows to elevate a boxer to Super Champion under special circumstances, the Championships Committee took the decision to grant this recognition to the American boxer. However, this does not mean that an Interim or Regular Super Lightweight title will be created. The WBA and the Championships Committee maintain their policy of having only one champion per category.

David-golota (talk) 00:42, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

"Your level of arrogance is beyond what I ever thought anybody could have on this site." – Again you couldn't make a post without bringing up conduct issues. So, we're not discussing the WBA. I've tried. See you at WP:DRN. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 01:49, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm inclined to side with Mac Dreamstate here. It seems that the WBA still has "super" and "regular" champions (in some divisions, at least for heavyweight as links demonstrate), so we should use that terminology. It's obviously stupid by the WBA but that's how it is. HampsteadLord (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 12 October 2017

Dmitry Bivol now WBA full champion at light heavyweight - http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-40004979-4 Fpwlada (talk) 03:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Question: you are asking that "Interim champion" is changed to "Full champion"? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:11, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Where there's an underlined extra line – Interim champ – it should be removed entirely, as the WBA has promoted Bivol from that status. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:10, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

The International Boxing Organisation?

Hi all, do we think that the International Boxing Organization should be included in this article? Their champions include Gennady Golovkin, Anthony Joshua and Chris Eubank Jr.. I believe that this is the only current worldwide organisation that is not on this page. Cheers --Baileybobfam (talk) 21:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose inclusion. The IBO is not, has never been, and will hopefully never be one of the four main boxing sanctioning bodies. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't think the IBO titles have enough recognition to be added to this list.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 00:05, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

I disagree, they have had some seriously impressive champions in years gone bye. Lennox Lewis, Wladimir Klitschko, Floyd Mayweather, Neseem Hamed, Ricky Hatton and Manny Pacquiao just to name a few.--Baileybobfam (talk) 14:47, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

No credible media outlets refer to the IBO as a major sanctioning body alongside the WBA, WBC, IBF, and WBO. It's included in published articles just because it's.. there. Like an annoying mosquito that tries to feed off a larger host. By adding the IBO to this list, we would be enabling yet more alphabet soup, which is a huge part of what's ruining boxing. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:44, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Oppose inclusion. There are several worldwide organisations that are not on this page, look at Wikipedia's List of boxing organisations. The answer to this seems pretty simple to me. The major sanctioning bodies recognize each other, and they are all in turn recognized by The Ring. If the four sanctioning bodies and The Ring, or a majority of them, ever recognized the IBO, then we would have to include them. It's circular reasoning but sadly that's the way the sport works. Fpwlada (talk) 21:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion of vacant titles

@Claudevsq: seems like Manuel Charr and Alexander Ustinov are going to be fighting for a WBA (Regular) heavyweight title this weekend. Also, the 2009 discussion under this section should probably be archived. Fpwlada (talk) 23:01, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, should be archived. But I don't know how to do it, just go ahead if you want... claudevsq (talk) 09:53, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

This new section should allow it to be archived--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:42, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Erdei has officially vacated today, just like expected! See here: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=24848 claudevsq (talk) 16:38, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Zsolt Erdei will give back his WBC title next Friday, January 22, 2010, because that's the date where the WBC would have held a purse bid for the Erdei-Wlodarczyk mandatory defence. Erdei said that he would relinquish his title that day. The WBC will then probably decide who will fight for the vacant title against Wlodarczyk, Fragomeni or International Champ Hide. claudevsq (talk) 11:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Some notes about the WBO super bantamweight championship were published yesterday. First, López won't vacate the title until he decides which will be his division, since he is on his voluntary stage. The article also states that he will briefly hold two belts if he defeats Luevano, being forced to subsequently vacate one of them, but the WBO won't strip him immediately (I wonder why?).[16] Once the super bantamweight belt is vacated, the new champion will be determined in a contest between Wilfredo Vázquez, Jr. and Marvin Sonsona, with a target date of March 2010. [17] - Caribbean~H.Q. 07:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

That's good news. The WBO has a rule that states a fighter has got 10 days to chose which belt he wants to keep; the IBO 60 days, in case of Pacman; others may have similar rules... ;-) claudevsq (talk) 04:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Sonsona has been stripped off his title, see: http://www.fightnews.com/?p=30192 claudevsq (talk) 19:38, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

JuanMa López has vacated his title because he'll move up and fight Luevano on January 23rd for Luevano's WBO featherweight title. Gamboa fights Mtagwa the same day, and the two winners could meet later next year... See: http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=23654 claudevsq (talk) 14:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

JuanMa has not vacated the title. He himself said that in the Vocero article above. Just because the Vester (boxingscene) artile was linked in the WBO site does not mean that WBO confirmed tha accuracy of the report. WBO links a lot of news in its site if the WBO is mentioned. Vester is normally reliable but he and you, Claude, jumped the gun in removing JuanMa from his title. WBO even has JuanMa in their champions list. Claude, why don't you check with the WBO first before you rely on a boxingscene report (which actually contradicts a PR report that quoted JuanMa). Why are you believing a Vester report instead of a report directly from PR and from the horse's mouth himself? Besides, JuanMa is still in his voluntary stage. JuanMa might vacate or might not but for the meantime keep the list at its accurate state at the present time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.130.174 (talk) 20:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

There are a lot of reports that he vacated the title, search Google. claudevsq (talk) 12:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

He hasn't done so yet, I keep track of the local media and neither Juanma nor Valcárcel have said anything. None of the newspapers, BoxeoMundial.com or prboxea.com have said anything either. We must not jump the gun yet. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I tried to phone the WBO yesterday, but I couldn't reach them. I'll try maybe again today... claudevsq (talk) 11:00, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Boxeo Mundial also say he's vacated his title: http://www.boxeomundial.net/boxeo.php?category=english&id=14850 claudevsq (talk) 11:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I just called the WBO, believe it or not, their offices were robbed; that's probably why I couldn't reach them yesterday. They told me to try again on monday... For those who don't wanna believe: Tel. +1 787 765-4444. claudevsq (talk) 16:09, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Seems like Martinó just mimicked BoxingScene, since today BoxeoMundial published a news article titled "OMB invita a Inauguración de Gimnasio José "Chegui" Torres en Patillas este lunes, 30 de noviembre" which still promotes Juanma as champion. Interestingly, Vázquez's promoter, Tutico Zabala, will be present on that activity as well. Since we have conflicting versions, let's see what the WBO says on the matter. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Right, Carib, I mailed already to Paco, but as it is weekend, I'll try to reach them by phone on Monday. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 05:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I just got an answer from Mario, he hasn't vacated yet. I've put him back. claudevsq (talk) 12:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

This is an e-mail from the WBO:

"Hi Claude:

He is going to go into the ring with holding his champion title. However, once in the ring, he loses his title and is dependent on winning the new title.

Best,

Doris Companys" claudevsq (talk) 00:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Yup, he mentioned it again on TV today, let's see how it goes. Its a shame that he ducked Caballero, but a fight with Gamboa should be interesting. Regards, - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't even know that he ducked a fight with Caballero... but if he beats Luevano, and Gamboa beats Mtagwa the same day, they will meet in June, and that will indeed be a good match. Just that the winner would then be the unified WBA/WBO champion, although Chris John is already the "WBA Super Champion" at featherweight, although with only one belt... Let's wait and see! Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 21:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Erislandry Lara nationality

They have Cuba as his flag and nationality. I mentioned this before and someone changed it to American, now it's back to Cuba. Lara defected from Cuba. Defecting is basically renouncing your nationality. He lives in America, his nickname is The American Dream, and Boxrec (one of the most reputable boxing sites out there) has him listed as American. Am I wrong here? Should he not be listed as American? Myth420 (talk) 08:46, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

I changed it back to USA. He is indeed an American national, and represents it, plus BoxRec lists him as American. If someone changes it yet again, it needs to be discussed here. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 13:50, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Light Middleweight Champion

Isn't Demetrius Andrade the WBA Regular Champion. Castano is the Interim Champion, correct? I'm pretty sure, but could be wrong Myth420 (talk) 04:43, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

You're wrong, Hurd is the unified WBA-IBF champion, and Castano is the regular champion. That's it, because Andrade has been stripped or relinquished his title quite some time ago, hence Castano was elevated... Next time, simply check the WBA ratings... ;-) claudevsq (talk) 07:31, 22 April 2018 (UTC)