A couple of things,
a) i am referring to the NWA/TNA Title as it was known at the time, when TNA broke away from TNA and it just became the TNA title that's not what I'm talking about. I did screw up by mentioning Booker T, as he only he only held the TNA Tag Titles and the TNA Legends Title (which we all know was a joke of a belt but again fact is he held it) but i mentioned him for another point i will get too.
I'm talking about a Title that is held by many legends of the industry, one that both Christian and R-Truth in TNA did hold, regardless of your opinions of R-Truth FACT IS he held that title, and is on the list of one of the most Prestige wrestling titles in History.
b) I'm not saying WWE should mention TNA by name, referring to them as former world champions is enough, i get that WWE doesn't want to acknowledge TNA directly and it shouldn't, Again other posters have mentioned they can acknowledge Ric Flair, if Sting or AJ Styles came over you bet they would acknowledge them as well, big names or not, Ricky Steamboat was a NWA champion, yet it is never mentioned on that he was IC, now the IC belt is all well and good, but Ricky Steamboat is one of the greatest in the world, yet they don't recognize him as a World Champion, because it never happened in WWE and that's wrong.
I mean a strong case for the mindset of Vince at times is this: not too long ago on RAW, Edge and Christian had a bit of a confrontation, and Edge was scripted to say (as i believe Edge being real life friends with Christian would recognize his history) "You have never been World Champion" (again as someone said they also ignored his WWE/ECW Championship, yet it is listed on WWE.Com), and Christian is response was scripted to agree with Edge, and acknowledge he wasn't when clearly he was. That is both Burial and Bullshit, and part of Vince as some said changing History to suit him.
I'm not saying also these guys should be billed as former World Champs as soon as they arrive either, but if they are going for a title shot why not have the announcers slide the reference in, it gives people a brief history lesson, and lets them know that they are championship material as it has been done before, and as always adds the extra momentum to their character. It ads depth, but also it is FACT, so why not use it.
I will agree WWE is good on acknowledging history outside of its walls but mainly AWA, WCW etc as other posters have said, but in regard to current superstars no, again they can mention Flair and his NWA title reigns, but not Christian? whether Ric flair is a bigger name then Christian or not shouldn't matter, again A World Champion is a World Champion, Period.
I know TNA is considered a joke to degree, and its holders of it's current TNA belt as someone posted are considered a bit of a joke to a degree as well, but again facts are facts, 2nd Promotion or not, when all is said and done the TNA title will also be recognized whether people like it or not. Same with ROH its belts are recognized. I don't know if any reads that PowerSlam magazine but they have a good list of belts they recognize as being World Champions, WWE, WCW, TNA, ROH, NWA, IWGP, AJPW, UFC, MMA and a few other promotions (as well as recognizing older belts like AWA etc) are included and i agree with their list, whether the company is run well or not it doesn't take away the FACT that holders in those companies have held them belts, respectively.
c) A good but small solution to this would be on Superstars individual profiles on WWE.com to list a proper Title History. I see no Problem with this, If WWE can advertise Mick Foleys TNA book: Countdown to Lockdown (which did no damage to WWE, and also opened up fans to tuning into TNA, more so then mentioning a TNA title, to counter act the marketing argument to a degree), then why not include actual history that WWE attempts to uphold (when it ain't changing facts), It's a small start but i would appreciate it as I'm sure many fans would.
Even list Booker T's Legends titles (as much of joke title it was Fact is he held it, it's part of his lineage), but in doing so people could also look up Daniel Bryan's history etc, again if they can mention TNA with Foley's book, or at times in their Former Industry News Section on the site, they were showing results of TNA Impacts and PPVs (i did look but noticed the Industry News section is gone, on the new WWE.com which is bad i liked that they were acknowledging wrestling as a whole when they did this, it was small attempt but as #1 company was the right thing to do, made WWE look like it legitimately appreciated wrestling worldwide, and added more prestige to its own company), then why not include actual History on these guys Profile pages, i cannot really see how this would hurt WWE, if anything they would look better for being a company that isn't biased in recognizing accomplishments, like Daniel Bryans, while they have slightly acknowledge it, its almost 11 years of his life his hard work they have taken away to a degree, same with others, that i don't agree with.