Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Basketball (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Basketball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Basketball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the quality scale.
 

Invitation to take part in discussion of use of "Nationality" field in a basketball infobox[edit]

There is a discussion taking place at Talk:Shoni Schimmel#Nationality concerning the proper use of this field for a Native American sportsperson. Please join the discussion to help reach consensus. Rikster2 (talk) 00:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Cornerman[edit]

I can't find any reliable sourcing to justify WP:GNG for Cornerman (basketball), aside from articles that repeat a quote that says that Elgin Baylor was the best cornerman ever. Unless this article can be improve, it might be best to redirect to Glossary of basketball terms.—Bagumba (talk) 23:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

How about merging it to Basketball positions, plus summaries of all of the hybrid positions that can be articles? –HTD 12:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not fond of merging material that is not reliably sourced. Can anyone at least vouch that its mostly factual? I've honestly never heard the term much.—Bagumba (talk) 18:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
I've been around basketball for 35+ years and never heard this term til Wikipedia. When I look at where I have seen the term used, it's mostly with players in the Philippines, so it had made me wonder if it is used there regionally. This is in contrast to "stretch forward" (or, "stretch four" to designate a perimeter-oriented power forward), which has been used more in the US and Europe in recent years. My two cents - this should just be deleted unless RS's are brought forward. Rikster2 (talk) 19:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
The main reason I'd say to redirect is because it's defined @merriam-webster.com and used as a term in books. Nothing, though, that expands on it being anything more than another term for a forward.—Bagumba (talk) 23:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
AFAIK it's not used that much in the Philippines. If a player can play both forward positions, he's called as a "forward". –HTD 12:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

High quality basketball images[edit]

I have been discussing image uploads with a Lithuanian photographer, Augustas Didzgalvis (User:A.BigHead), and he is interested in releasing some images of basketball games/people (e.g. File:Juan Carlos Navarro by Augustas Didzgalvis.jpg)

He is happy to release some images, but needs some assistance with categorisation of the images on Commons and placement of the images in relevant articles on Wikipedia. Essentially, he would like to make sure any images he donates will be well used (not an unreasonable desire!). Would anyone be able to devote some time assisting him with these images? If so, you may contact him via email (available on left menu link on his user page). SFB 15:48, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy to help if a list of images is put on my talk page. Thanks, this is great! Rikster2 (talk) 18:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
@Rikster2: Good stuff. I have advised him to place new basketball images into the commons category Commons:Category:Images by Augustas Didzgalvis (basketball). You should be able to keep track of any new additions there. Any help with any of his other works would also be welcome! SFB 19:38, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
I added the first set of photos in the file and will add more, tag and categorize this evening. Rikster2 (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

NBA court diagram[edit]

Hi! I'm from pl-wiki and I'm looking for an image of NBA court diagram. We have FIBA court diagram (File:Boisko koszykowki FIBA 2010.svg), but for NBA I've found only this ones: File:Basketball courts.svg, File:Basketball court.png). Does exist image which relates only to the NBA? Could somebody create this? Greetings, Mariusz Swornóg (talk) 08:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:RFD notice[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_August_16#Malik_Newman. The stars of the 2014 FIBA Under-17 World Championship (Newman and Diamond Stone) are up for discussion.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

standard for listing of nationalities[edit]

On a club team's page, what is the standard for listing an individual player's nationality: is it place of birth, citizenship, or national team affiliation. Additionally, how are UK players typically handled, are the GBR or ENG/SCO/WAL. Question has come up on NBA pages and I wondered if it has been discussed here. Thank you.18abruce (talk) 18:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Education Program: Cornell University/Online Communities edit 1992 United States men's Olympic basketball team[edit]

Course Page

As part of a class assignment Cjm274, ket47, gk252, and mjm627 will be making editing to the 1992 United States men's Olympic basketball team page. Our goal is to improve this article's rate to at least a B-Class.

I wanted to know if it would be possible to add per36 and per100 statistics to the page. I was advised by Bagumba to discuss the issue here. I was told there was no consensus on these stats, but I imagine if you could get a hold of the minutes played per game then at least per36 would be easily to calculate. There is also a concern about whether these stats are to much information for the casual reader. Does anyone know where we could get the game notes for these 8 games played in 1992 ?

Also please feel free to give us any suggestions about what to improve on the page or information about good sources. We have discussed some of the things we plan to edit and add on the talk page, but we are completely open to suggestions.

Thank You - Cjm274 (talk) 11:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The FIBA archive has minutes played stats at for the 1992 Olympic Games. See for example, [1]. Also, there are only 10 minutes per quarter in FIBA play, so I dunno how the stats could add up... –HTD 13:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, the FIBA archive should be sufficient. I am not sure whether the it would be per30 or per40 since it is 10 minute quarters, but I will see what is the common practice. Also we want to do a comparison section that compares the Dream Team's stats (average margin of victory, scoring, opponent scoring, medals, and opponents field goal percentage) with later teams like 1996,2000, etc. We can calculate all this information from the FIBA archive, but do you know of any pages that have this information? Something similar to this: NBA Dream Team: By the Numbers . - Cjm274 (talk) 16:36, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I suppose the FIBA archive has stats for the 1996 and 2000 teams... –HTD 16:39, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm wary of WP:NOTSTATSBOOK. While the stats are accurate, anything beyond totals or per game averages seems excessive and not often used in prose by mainstream sources, nor has there been prior precedent in Wikipedia basketball articles AFAIK.—Bagumba (talk) 22:44, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure if we will be continuing with the per stats but I do have some questions about making an infobox for the page. I was hoping to have something that would include title, image, coach, nickname, with a header for 1992 Olympic Games (under header: medal, and record) and 1992 Tournament of the Americas results (under header: finishing position and record). I am having trouble locating a template. The templates from pages like Basketball at the 1988 Summer Olympics and United States men's national basketball team are the closest I can find. I noticed the 2012 United States men's Olympic basketball team also does not have a template, so should I use a skeleton info box? -Cjm274 (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you can see if other sports have a national team template for a specific event, and borrow from it? If not, be bold and create one for basketball, or generically for any sport. I'd advise against having a nickname field, as historically they invite non-verifiable, fancruft.—Bagumba (talk) 18:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

2014 United States FIBA World Championship for Women basketball team[edit]

When they announce the final roster for the US, we should have a page dedicated to the team. There's no reason not to, especially when there is the men's team page. Same format as the men's team page as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.197.172 (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Any new article must meet the general notability guideline. They are not created to attempt to neutralize gender bias, noble as the cause may be.—Bagumba (talk) 18:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Notability of KK HEO and its players[edit]

Is the team KK HEO considered notable? Are its players (including Predrag Radovanović) considered notable as professional athletes? The team is located in Bosnia, and I am having difficulty finding sources other than videos on YouTube. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 04:46, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

I can do some research on the club but the players would need to meet WP:GNG. There is no presumption of notability for players in the Bosnian League. There are very few leagues where notability is presumed across the board, you can find that list at WP:NBASKETBALL. If you do a search and don't think the players are notable, feel free to WP:PROD or WP:AfD. Rikster2 (talk) 11:35, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Why don't a Wikiproject:European basketball?[edit]

Hi, people. I don't know where is the best place to post this so I'll do it here.

I see we are many users interested in topics related to European basketball and I think this could deserve a WikiProject similar as the College Basketball's one. There are many competitions, players, clubs, etc and many ways to improve the articles or to get a consensus about formats, notability, etcetera. What do you think? (Please remove this if you consider this useless) Asturkian (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Jersey numbers for retired players[edit]

Currently, most former NBA players have their past jersey numbers listed in their infobox e.g. Michael Jordan (not sure if players from other leagues are as widely populated). Generally, only the pro numbers have been listed. However, one recent edit to Reggie Miller had added to the list a number worn for a national team. Based on an earlier discussion regarding Jordan's number a few months back, a further discussion on options for listing numbers seems appropriate. Results of this discussion can lead to changes in Template:Infobox basketball biography and/or the template documentation at Template:Infobox basketball biography/doc.

Options for listing numbers of former players include

  • Numbers from professional teams
  • Numbers from national teams
  • Numbers from college teams
  • Numbers from high school teams
  • Number from AAU teams

I'm thinking we should just not list any numbers for former players to avoid bureucracy of which former number are "allowed" to be listed. Otherwise, we should limit it to pro teams only.—Bagumba (talk) 01:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Agree with pro only, unless player only played at college/AAU level. In that case, those numbers are the relevant ones. Rikster2 (talk) 01:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I think pro only regardless. If college jersey numbers are allowed, it'll be tough to distinguish between "all" jersey numbers and "only" pro jersey numbers to the vast majority of editors who aren't WP:Basketball/WP:College Basketball/WP:NBA regulars. Restricting to professional numbers only is a clear, definitive, unambiguous end-all parameter. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:01, 3 October 2014‎ (UTC)


  • There is no reason why retired college jersey numbers cannot be mentioned in the main body text. Frankly, we need to stop trying to jam the entire career of prominent athletes into their infoboxes by listing every award, honor or championship they ever won. The infobox honors are intended to be "highlights," not a comprehensive list. More than 8 to 10 infobox honors is overkill; the rest, if they are truly significant, can be mentioned in the main body text. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 06:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
    • DL, I believe we are talking about the numbers worn by a player over their career which appears at the top of the infobox for retired players. Retired numbers in the infobox would be a different discussion. Rikster2 (talk) 10:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Well . . . never mind. If we're talking about what former jersey numbers (as opposed to retired jersey numbers) get displayed in the infobox, it's only supposed to include pro jersey numbers, not college, high school or the Cub Scouts. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Before giving my opinion on this issue, I want to note something to other contributors. After player become officially retired from the professional basketball, we should replace some parts of the template ("number" and "position" with "career_number" and "career_position" respectively), in order to make a more visual difference between active and retired players. That is why a "career information" section is made for, to give a general overview of players playing history (high school, collage, nba draft, pro career, number(s) and position(s)). To get back on the topic, numbers from high school, college and AAU definitely shouldn't be mentioned there. Professional club numbers definitely goes there hehe. However, I believe that numbers from the national team should go all the way together with pro ones. I really don't have some valuable argument for this, yet it seems "natural" to me to present national teams as part of their professional careers. Writing this, I realize how weak this statement is. Do athletes sign contracts with the national teams? If that is the case, that should work things out. Other then that, readers should get confused, like "where that number came from?" Sorry for speculating, since I obviously didn't give a good solution.--AirWolf talk 11:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

  • I agree with you that the "career_number" and "career_position" fields look better for retired players. They were created for coaches who used to play, but I think we should carry this through with all retired players as you suggest. Not a fan of using national team numbers. Some players have 2-3 different numbers and frankly the allowable range of numbers is much smaller than exists for pro teams so I'm not sure how representative of the player it is. Feels like Michael Jordan might have opted for #23 if he'd had the option, but he didn't. I also just don't think people identify players with national team numbers all that much - certainly not to the degree they do their professional number. Rikster2 (talk) 11:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

This is quite easy, actually. If you're retired, you don't get to play, and you don't have a number. That is, unless that number is also retired. I'd even limit the displayed numbers on the infobox to the current one s/he's using. –HTD 13:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Retired numbers are typically listed under "highlights" in infobox, so they shouldn't be repeated again if we decide to not keep the other numbers. Besides, if such a field were supported e.g. retired_number, people may mistakenly place (all) numbers of the retired player, and not just the retired number(s).—Bagumba (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Then only the current players are the problem. I'd suggest using the current number they're using. So if they're in a national team, add that too when the national team is playing. Free agents don't get a number. They only get a number when they're a part of the team, if they aren't part of that team, his/her number shouldn't be there.
Also, are "jersey numbers" a regular fixture in articles now? If they aren't, and since infoboxes are supposed to be summaries, all the more reason that jersey numbers shouldn't be there at all. –HTD 16:59, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
People update infoboxes all the time with speculation of new numbers when a player changes teams, but it's rarely updated in prose. Steve Nash's No. 10 with LA is mentioned, but the practice is limited to more popular players. Height and weight are usually not mentioned in prose either, but the general consensus is probably that they are important enough to be in the infobox anyways.—Bagumba (talk) 17:19, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I could understand height and weight at the infobox, as they affect ability and style of play. They're also sometimes included on basketball players' prose ("at age 16, he was already seven feet tall"), and even sometimes in paragraphs explaining how a player has an effect on the game ("despite being less than 6-6, he was able to dominate rebounding"). This is something that you can't do with jersey numbers, although I'd concede that someone can make a section if there's a story behind to it, but that's mostly on famous players. –HTD 17:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Just did a quick survey of team sports and it appears only basketball and American football show numbers for retired players. We could remove them, though I would imagine we will have a big change management issue both in converting the 1000s of articles away from using this information and in users adding it back in since they are used to them being there. There would be less of that if we moved the info to "career_number" as the info would still be in the article, though the conversion activity would still need to happen. Rikster2 (talk) 18:01, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Let's separate what we ideally want to display from the logistics of how it is implemented. Bots are always an option for tedious work, but in this case Template:Infobox basketball biography could just be programatically tweaked to not display a number if "career_end" is set—similar to how it already determines if a player is retired to control the display of career stats.—Bagumba (talk) 18:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm opposing an idea to don't display retired numbers. Just because we have sort of a "problem" here, that shouldn't lead us to such drastically solutions.--AirWolf talk 18:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Can't the jersey numbers for retired (and current) players be on the part of the infobox that lists their former teams? Having a separate section all by themselves isn't very helpful. I want to know what team Player X wore number X for. –HTD 20:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Parameters commentary[edit]

Hi! I need your commentary (and possible solution) on two parameters in the Template:Infobox basketball biography (descriptions given next to each one):

  • "career_number" - The number(s) worn while a player. Used when a former player is now an active coach, or an active player that has worn other numbers.
  • "career_position" - The position(s) played while a player. Used when a former player is now an active coach.

I don't think these descriptions are quite adequate. I do think that all the retired players should have given parameters instead of "number" and "position" parameters. How it is now, we are making double standards for retired players. Legally speaking, that is called a selective justice. All the other retired players should have replaced parameters. Players who got some sporting position in some organization, should have "position", "career_position" and "career_number" parameters. As of now, if somebody want to do what I proposed, he is doing illegal action because of the descriptions I've mentioned. And they should change. If not, we will have ton of similar cases to this: [2].

Note: This discussion is inspired by the previous discussion here called "Jersey numbers for retired players" and this revert (in given link).--AirWolf talk 18:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm sure it is not your intention, but the legal analogy could lead to cries of WP:WIKILAWYERING. I'd suggest avoiding a fragmented discussion, and for those interested to comment above at #Jersey_numbers_for_retired_players to determine if jersey numbers for retired players should be displayed. Once there is agreement on what we want, it can be easily determined how it should be executed e.g. which parameters to use, introduce new ones if needed, etc.—Bagumba (talk) 18:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Listing national team number as current number[edit]

First, totally disagree that national team number should EVER be the current number in the infobox. 99% of national team players are under contract with a team and have a number with that team. I see no point in updating their number for a month while the Olympics or World Cup are going on, then reverting it back to their pro team at the close. That's needless change to the article. For current and retired players I see value in their pro numbers being in the infobox, but HTD's comments make me further support AirWolf's suggestion to only use the "Career_number" field for retired player numbers. Personally, I think the number is useful for active players (which is why pretty much every major team sport project - except hockey, who is always a little different - uses them as a standard). For retired ones I can go either way, but since we have a field that clearly marks "career number" and cleanly puts it in the infobox, why not? I should think some people would go to Wikipedia to find out what number some former player wore. Rikster2 (talk) 17:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The only place where national team basketball isn't a thing is the U.S. In other places where basketball is reasonably followed, it's quite popular. This is a yearly summer thing. It's not just "a couple" of games. Together with warmups, it could last up to 20 games, which is just as long as a U.S. college basketball conference regular season. What could be interesting is that the national team number could be the same with the club jersey number because leagues elsewhere use FIBA rules. (With that said, there are now many leagues that don't do this, and FIBA is on its way on letter all 2-digit numbers be used.) –HTD 18:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I didn't say it was a couple of games, I said it's about a month (true) at a time when the player is almost always under contract with a pro team. It isn't that national team play isn't important in the US - we follow it - it's just that national team is not their team of record and national team rosters reflect this by listing their club of record (Chicago Bulls, Real Madrid, Alaska Aces, etc). I would counter your "the only place where national team basketball isn't a thing is the U.S." comment by saying that my perception is that the only country that users seem to try to update player articles to reflect national team temporarily is the Philippines. Based on my experience of course. Rikster2 (talk) 18:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
It's actually more than a month; it's the entire northern hemisphere summer. The Iranian national team played 19 competitive games in three tournaments from July to October. They've played several "friendlies" too, so it's more than 20. That's a lot. If you're omitting that from the "jersey number" situation that's quite an omission.
And yeah, updating on articles about the national team is actually quite useful, unlike keeping track all of their favorite player's jersey numbers, which is pretty banal. Like it contributes nothing. It's not even (mostly) about basketball. –HTD 18:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Wow - no need to be a dick. You made a generalization about the US so I did the same about the Philippines. Neither is 100% correct and probably not fully reflective of what we are trying to say. And at no point was I saying national team participation shouldn't be updated in the article, I just said the national team and national team number shouldn't be the current team/number of record in the infobox during national team play. They are under contract with their pro teams at that point so why needlessly flip colors and numbers? Rikster2 (talk) 18:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I dunno about saying that national team exploits should not be added, nor flipping colors (I assume the club colors, again another needless customization, would be used), but adding the current national team jersey number looks legit enough even for a month if you guys are insisting on adding the player's club jersey number four teams ago in the infobox. That's all there is to it. If you guys are insisting on adding all of the jersey numbers from a player's pro career, it'll make sense to include the jersey number he's wearing for about 20 games/year when he's actually wearing it. –HTD 18:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: Above refactored from #Jersey numbers for retired players, which dealt with retired—not active—players.—Bagumba (talk) 19:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Now I'm confused - who said anything about a bunch of old numbers for active players? I thought that was just for retired players and the proposal was which numbers to use. Rikster2 (talk) 19:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Oops, sorry. Looking at Trevor Ariza, I thought old numbers for current players were in the infobox. Looking at Steve Kerr, all of them (pro) just show up when they quit. It would be interesting though if it included Kerr's number while playing for Arizona as he sorta makes a deal out of it whenever he can. –HTD 19:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Consensus will decide to what level consistency should be a factor in handling of numbers for active players vs former players. I would caution against blanket WP:ALLORNOTHING arguments. FWIW from ESPN on global interest in hoops: "It is difficult to measure world interest in basketball, but these FIBA games may hint at how invested these other countries are in the sport -- just as our relative weakness in soccer is indicative of how we care relatively less about it." Also, I wonder if verifiability will be a pain for determining if drive-by edits are placing bogus professional numbers or valid national team numbers.—Bagumba (talk) 19:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Generally, verifying uniform number in pro leagues is pretty easy, just requiring going to the team or league site and occasionally using "Google translate." Rikster2 (talk) 19:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I was referring to finding national team numbers. (I pretty much edit NBA players only, so basketball-reference is my go to there for historical #s.)—Bagumba (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
If we're basing it on Wikipedia page view stats, basketball is a more popular sport than rugby union.
Re:Verifiability -- just recently an IP made driveby edits on national and club team UNIFORMS, and it's impossible to verify at that time if they were right. Verifying numbers is easier. –HTD 19:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The whole discussion has gone in insanely wrong way. Parameter "number" for active players should only contain jersey number of player's pro club (if he is under contract). National team jersey number should be included in "career_number" parameter ONLY AFTER player retires. I mean, it would be ridiculous to put jersey number in "number" parameter while the tournament is being played. Common people, get back to the previous discussion for retired players. This is leading to wasting your time, with no clear consensus in sight.--AirWolf talk 19:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

That's, for a lack of a better word, weird: "it would be ridiculous to put jersey number in "number" parameter while the tournament is being played." I thought it would be more ridiculous on putting the jersey number of a team that he's not currently playing for.
Also, how about current college or high school players? How about, say, someone like Dante Exum, whose only "real" competitive tournaments until the draft were... gasp! national team tournaments? College teams aren't pro teams, so no numbers? What if the player plays in an under-xx national team? Again, these are unpopular in the U.S. (never said no one cared), but is quite reasonably followed in places where basketball is a thing. –HTD 19:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, because basketball clearly isn't a thing in the US. You may want to back away from your computer and take a few deep breaths. You're getting needlessly worked up about this. We're just talking about our opinions on how numbers should be displayed for current and retired players. On college players, I would say that we migrated the NCAA athlete infobox to basketball biography for consistency and for ease of conversion down the road and current number was an important consderation to WP:CBB at the time. I do believe that college number should appear for current college players, and that's the only case. I'd be cool with saying HS players don't show a number at all personally. Rikster2 (talk) 19:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Stop misrepresenting what I said. I didn't say "basketball isn't popular in the U.S.", I said "national team tournaments aren't popular". Come on, dude, you can try harder than that straw man. The only tournament that's popular is the Olympics. The Blazers probably had a bigger attendance than the last FIBA Americas Championship in the U.S. –HTD 20:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I believe most people were commenting on pro players. I don't think anyone is arguing to remove current numbers for active college players. High school player articles are rare, but Jalen Brunson has only one number, 15, presumably his current HS number. His U18 No. 50 is not listed.[3]Bagumba (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
That's interesting. I thought national team numbers were only from 4-15... –HTD 20:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
HTD did suggest college players maybe shouldn't have numbers if we go "pro only," but I'm not sure if he was serious. The issue with HS numbers is that they are much harder to verify than college, pro or national team numbers. Rikster2 (talk) 20:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Holy crap reading comprehension. I didn't suggest anything re: college players. People were worked up on pro players, there was no discussion on what to do with current college players, who are obviously not pro players, therefore can't use the "use pro team jersey number" rule. –HTD 20:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Holy crap settle down. That is how I read "College teams aren't pro teams, so no numbers?" If I misinterpreted what you said, I apologize. What the hell is your issue? You and I have dealt with each other just fine in the past and I am really having trouble understanding why you are so torqued up about this. Rikster2 (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
That's because they're not under the "current pro team" rule that we all agree on. That's why the default is, since they're not signed to a pro team, they should have no numbers as per the rule. Also, it ended with a question mark, so I asked about what to do, not "suggested" it. –HTD 20:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I can say I took it as a rhetorical question. We should all WP:DISENGAGE for a bit perhaps. Too much hoops experience among us to not figure this out eventually.—Bagumba (talk) 20:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I was just peeved by the use of the word "suggest". I do not intend to leave college players' infoboxes jersey numbers blank if pro players would be having one. –HTD 20:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry for bad writing in that sentence. "I thought it would be more ridiculous on putting the jersey number of a team that he's not currently playing for." - That's why career_number is meant for. Parameter "name" should only contain jersey number of current pro team, nothing else.
You are constantly jumping from theme to theme, probably intentionally trying to sabotage the discussion. College players do have jersey numbers, but as they turn pro, only jersey numbers from their respective teams should be considered. Under-xx national teams are considered competition for young players (under-senior level, junior etc.). I am from Serbia (where all the FIBA competitions matters), and I am against jersey numbers of national teams there. However, jersey numbers of senior national teams should be mentioned by putting together with pro club jersey numbers in "career_number" parameter of the template (AFTER player retire). Period.--AirWolf talk 20:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
As I said above, why not put these jersey numbers on the part of the infobox where the teams he played/playing for are listed? Heck, even amateur team numbers could be added there. –HTD 20:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Personally, I think this would crowd the club history section. It already has year span, team name and sometimes league/country (inconsistently), I think that is a lot to put in that section cleanly. Rikster2 (talk) 20:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Agree on clutter, unless a mockup can show otherwise.—Bagumba (talk) 20:16, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd personally get rid of the league as that's not used in other sportspeople infoboxes such as football; also several, mostly European, teams play in several leagues in one season. If there'd be jersey numbers at the infobox, the best course of action is to bring them to the teams list, instead of being isolated on their own section that makes them useless, and ultimately, clutter. Jersey numbers on the teams list is the best solution. –HTD 20:19, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Stop it. You went out of discussion once again. How to prove that player was wearing that and that number? By some Googled picture? See, it would work for NBA, national teams, Euroleague. What about other leagues? And what about all that work on thousands of articles? Your propositions are becoming more and more childish, amateur.--AirWolf talk 20:25, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Then don't add jersey numbers. That's the entire problem for this, right? I originally wanted to get rid of all of them. –HTD 20:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I'd advocate for getting rid of country/league in club history but leaving it at span and team name so white space would be used effectively in that section. I think it'd be much cleaner that way - but Bagumba may be on to something in mocking it up. Maybe I'd change my tune if adding the number were done well. Rikster2 (talk) 20:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm definitely withdrawing from the discussion, as it obviously became unaccountable.--AirWolf talk 20:37, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
"Jersey numbers" on their own, especially for retired players, need context. When I saw Steve Kerr's infobox, I wanted to know which teams he wore #2, 4 and 5. Just having them there is useless for the reader, as he would immediately want to know what teams he played for playing those numbers. Also, for retired numbers, we can even use cute little graphics. For example:
As a player:
1993–1998: Chicago Bulls (#25)
For Larry Bird:
As a player:
1979–1992: Boston Celtics Celtics33.png
Or we can opt the simpler (#33). Also, we could add stats just like the football infobox someday. –HTD 20:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Also if we're using cute little graphics, perhaps the jersey numbers should be in a separate column between the seasons and team columns, to make it neater. –HTD 20:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
So, you are a "basketball-reference" guy? Stats like on it.wiki? Get out of here. Lot of non-sense and time wasting came from you tonight. I'm done, screw it.--AirWolf talk 20:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I can't understand the animosity. I'm not from it.wiki nor do I use the basketball-reference website frequently. I'm good with your suggestion on retired players, but the jersey numbers should be in the context of the teams, as without them they're useless. –HTD 20:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Consensus can change, but here was the past discussion on including leagues at Template_talk:Infobox_basketball_biography#How_to_list_non-NBA_teams.3F_Should_non-NBA_teams_have_their_leagues_listed.3F. The most compelling argument from User:Martin tamb was "More information wouldn't hurt, and it's clearer for readers who are not familiar with overseas basketball teams." It's implementation, however, has always been US-centric as discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Basketball_Association/Archive_21#Noting_professional_leagues.2Fcountries_in_infobox.—Bagumba (talk) 20:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Almost all basketball leagues aren't just known by their 3 (or 4)-letter initials. Some have longer names and are an untidy fit. I'd rather use IOC codes, TBH (with the exception of the NBA). –HTD 20:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Mulled over the number in club history idea some more. Most players keep the same number more or less from team to team. IMO, this would look rather silly to repeat the same info line-by-line in the infobox, esp for journeymen players. I think all the past numbers listed on one line is all the real estate I would invest for an infobox. I understand that diehard fans might want to know which specific teams a number applied to. Is that really in the scope of an encyclopedia i.e. WP:FANCRUFT? If yes, place the detail in the stats section in the article, instead of in the infobox. There, number buffs can indicate the exact season during his Chicago tenure that Jordan wore a No. 12 jersey for one game. However, I personally will be adding "real" content to articles and am unlikely to help with the grunt work of populating this.—Bagumba (talk) 19:24, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
The inclusion of jersey numbers on its own without context is cruft. That's why, for current players, the number is mentioned together with the team. Unless there's some cute story with the number that has plenty of sources, the jersey number won't be mentioned in the prose, and ultimate, should not had been in the infobox. –HTD 02:13, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

CfD - American men's basketball players[edit]

There is a discussion underway about this category. Please give your opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 October 11#American men's basketball players. This category was created about a year ago and currently has about 60 articles in it (obviously very underpopulated). I would like to see strong representation from people who actually work basketball artices (and other similarly structured sports) weigh in as this would essentially signal a new category structure to be built and implemented (50 state-specific men's and 50 state-specific women's categories). There are pros and cons to the structure, but whatever your views I would like to ensure that the decision reached is one reached by robust dialogue and careful consideration. Especially as this did not occur the last time this category was CfD'ed. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 17:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

YYYY in basketball[edit]

I edited the YYYY in basketball pages (e.g. 1998_in_basketball) to add the following college information:

  1. John R. Wooden Award (Men and women)
  2. Naismith College Player of the Year (Men and women)
  3. Naismith College Coach of the Year (Men and women)
  4. Legends of Coaching Award
  5. Wade Trophy (Women)
  6. Frances Pomeroy Naismith Award (Men and women)
  7. Associated Press Women's College Basketball Player of the Year (Women)
  8. Associated Press College Basketball Player of the Year (Men)
  9. NCAA Basketball Tournament Most Outstanding Player (Men and women)
  10. Basketball Academic All-America Team (Women)
  11. Kay Yow Award (Women)
  12. Carol Eckman Award (Women)
  13. Maggie Dixon Award (Women)
  14. USBWA National Freshman of the Year (Men and women)
  15. Associated Press College Basketball Coach of the Year (Men)
  16. Associated Press College Basketball Coach of the Year (Women)
  17. List of Senior CLASS Award women's basketball winners (Women)
  18. Nancy Lieberman Award (Women)
  19. Naismith Outstanding Contribution to Basketball (Men and women)

WNBA

  1. WNBA Most Valuable Player Award
  2. WNBA Defensive Player of the Year Award
  3. WNBA Rookie of the Year Award
  4. WNBA Sixth Woman of the Year Award
  5. WNBA Most Improved Player Award
  6. Kim Perrot Sportsmanship Award
  7. WNBA Coach of the Year Award
  8. WNBA All-Star Game MVP
  9. WNBA Finals Most Valuable Player Award

FIBA—Missing HOF inductees (2007, 2009, 2010)

WBHOF—All inductees

There are a number of men's collegiate awards I did not add, in case someone wants to work on that.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Player positions[edit]

I noticed a team using "P" as a player position (Post, not Point guard). Any objection to adding "P" as an allowable position in the CBB roster templates?--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Personally I think we're better off sticking to the 5 basic positions - center, power forward, small forward, shooting guard, point guard (with generic "guard" and "forward" when specifics aren't available). I think "post" generally means a C/PF so why not just use the split position? Where did you see it? I'd probably want to take a look and see the context. Rikster2 (talk) 15:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Lamar I was tempted to use the FC designation, but I see that Marquelle Williams is listed as a Forward/Center, so they think the positions are different. Not a big deal. --S Philbrick(Talk) 15:45, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Rade Lončar[edit]

Hi, not a regular basketball editor so now that I came across a new article Rade Lončar I thought I should ask, is he notable?. And please if someone could look at sources. Someone BLP prodded the article but the creator removed the tag and has added facebook and twitter as sources (and some other source). Thank you. QED237 (talk) 19:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention[edit]

This is a notice about Category:Basketball articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

CfD - Basketball players from Louisville, Kentucky[edit]

You are invited to take part in a discussion about this category at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 October 24#Sport players from Louisville, Kentucky. Rikster2 (talk) 13:34, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Basketball[edit]

The portal is so pathetic we could improve it in time for 2015. Are there featured content that we could use? –HTD 14:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Selected article:
    • January -- Any
    • February -- Any
    • March -- US NCAA
    • April -- NBA Playoffs
    • May -- EuroBasket
    • June -- NBA Finals
    • July -- Any
    • August -- Olympics/FIBA tournaments
    • September -- Olympics/FIBA tournaments
    • October -- Women's basketball
    • November -- Any
    • December -- Media (Film/TV show/music/etc) about basketball
  • Selected picture: preferably a person/event related to that month
    • January
    • February
    • March
    • April
    • May
    • June
    • July
    • August
    • September
    • October
    • November
    • December
  • Selected biography: preferably a person who was born/died on that month
    • January
    • February
    • March
    • April
    • May
    • June
    • July
    • August
    • September
    • October
    • November
    • December
  • DYK/OTMonth sections
    • We could use hoops-related DYKs. –HTD 13:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
HTD - I agree this could be a good area to focus. Black History Month in the US is February and Women's History Month is March. These might drive some article ideas (pioneers in the sport, etc.) I am happy to participate in a plan, but probably not drive it. I do think getting more basketball DYKs would be a great idea. We also never seem to get basketball people called out as "Recent Deaths" section on the front page. I think when Naismith HOFers die they should be called out in this way. Rikster2 (talk) 14:42, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The thing is once we got everything set up, we wouldn't have to do anything for the rest of the year. It should not be a lot of work. We'd just get basketball related stuff from WP:FA and WP:GA. The "major work" would be compiling DYKs and OTMonth blurbs. DYK must have plenty of basketball-related blurbs from 2014. I'd caution on making it overly U.S. centric, though... –HTD 15:08, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Only Black history month is US-centric. Women's History month is celebrated the same month in the UK and Australia as well (at a minimum), and every year we get a request from the women's history wikiproject to do something and it doesn't happen. Rikster2 (talk) 15:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I was referring to my suggestions of having US competitions locking up four months.. we can probably ditch the NBA Playoffs and replace it with Black History Month. The women's history month is great as women's basketball has to have the highest participation in team sports amongst women. I just dunno if there are articles on women's basketball that are good enough. –HTD 16:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trey Burke/archive1[edit]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Trey Burke/archive1 has been open for 2 and a half weeks without any substantive commentary.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Request for Comment[edit]

There is a Request for Comment about "Chronological Summaries of the Olympics" and you're invited! Becky Sayles (talk) 07:39, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

AfD input[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert LaBoy could use some more input to form a consensus and avoid a relisting.—Bagumba (talk) 23:54, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia Kickstarter campaign by User:TonyTheTiger[edit]

Please spread the word about #TTTWFTW, my Kickstarter campaign.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:05, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kellie Torrey[edit]

Dear basketball experts: This old AfC submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable player, or should the page be let go? —Anne Delong (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

She is not notable per N:BASKETBALL or N:COLLATH. I'd say let it go unless she passes GNG some other way. Rikster2 (talk) 21:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Rikster2. The page is gone now. —Anne Delong (talk) 01:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Merging Template:Infobox WNBA player into Template:Infobox basketball biography[edit]

Per this discussion, there was agreement to merge the WNBA template into the broader, more encompassing "basketball biography" player/coach template. When an admin went to do it, he/she found issues with merging due to differences in how the two templates display information. I'd like to recommend some changes to the template to allow for this change. I will sign up to do a lot of the conversions (as I have with merging the Australian, Philippine and college infoboxes previously) if we can reach agreement. Here are my recommendations:

  1. Create fields for the WNBA draft similar to the PBA draft for Filipino players (e.g. "wnba_draft_year," "wnba_draft_team," etc.). There should be four fields for year, round, pick and team and should display in the same way that NBA draft does for male players.
  2. One issue with the WNBA is that it is purely a Summer League, creating some strange club history chronologies (eg - a player could compete for ten years with the New York Liberty in the Summer and with Fenerbahçe in the Summer, making for 20 repetitive entries in the current usage). My suggestion is that we create a set of club years that display as "WNBA teams" above the standard set of clubs. Not sure if the template could be coded so that the "standard" fields (eg - "years1," "team1," etc) would display the header "Non-WNBA teams" if the "WNBA" fields were in use. This would be similar to how "as player" displays before the standard fields when the "coach" fields (eg "cyears1," "cteam1," etc) are used and "as coach displays before the coach teams. This could be an issue if a player is a WNBA player, also plays in Europe and goes on to coach. I'm not smart enough to figure this one out, but I figure somebody out there can help solve it.
  3. Create a Hall of Fame flag for the Women's Basketball Hall of Fame like the current Naismith (field name "HOF_player"), FIBA HOF ("FIBA_HOF_player"), and College basketball HOF ("CBBASKHOF_year").
  4. Create coding to link a WNBA profile (if possible)

I believe that the rest of the template would not need to be changed. There are some differences with how the WNBA template chose to show info (like adding "WNBA's" before the team name at the top), but I do not believe that the info for WNBA players is substantially different beyond what I have proposed and can match what exists for "basketball biography." I believe it is very important that we get these merged, as we are seeing more movement between men's and women's leagues (examples - Joe Bryant, Michael Cooper and most recently Becky Hammon. It looks AWFUL to have two infoboxes on an article, and in these cases is unnecessary. Thoughts? Rikster2 (talk) 00:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

The Becky Hammon example is a great one as to why these need to be merged. You can't add her current assistant role with the Spurs to the WNBA box because the Spurs colors won't display. You can't add her playing career to basketball biography because she had significant WNBA and overseas careers, which that box can't accommodate. But the is 99% overlap in the other info in the 2 boxes. Rikster2 (talk) 00:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Re: WNBA draft -- Quite a few leagues elsewhere are doing drafts lately (such as the Korean Basketball League). Perhaps making a generic draft parameter should work.
Re: Summer league -- I don't think we'd need a separate area for WNBA teams. Let's just treat their spells in a WNBA team as one "spell", then the team from elsewhere as one "spell". If they change a team, list it after whichever of the two the player was later signed. For example:
  • CSKA Moscow (2006-11)
  • Phoenix Mercury (2007-10)
  • Connecticut Sun (2010-present)
  • Galatasaray (2011-present)
HTD 11:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Personally, I find that structure very confusing as in 99% of club histories are a chronology, but can go along with whatever the consensus determines. Rikster2 (talk) 11:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
TBH I dunno how a separate section for WNBA teams would work when a reader realizes that the years of service overlap. I'd probably settle on a note. A WNBA contract doesn't usually rescind a player's contract from another team. –HTD 13:34, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I've been following this conversation and merge process for a while. While I endorse most of Rikster's comments above, I also recognize the problem regarding overlapping WNBA and overseas team tenures. A high percentage of second-tier and even some of the first-tier WNBA talent plays overseas during the WNBA off-season. To my way of thinking, I don't see the justification for creating a separate WNBA career history; the only practical solution is to accept overlapping team tenures in the career history section. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

But the whole Summer season/Winter season thing is what the WNBA editors would be giving up in merging templates - I don't see why we shouldn't accommodate this difference. I would argue most WNBA players play somewhere else in the traditional basketball season. If Candace Parker and Brittney Griner do it, most do. Unless someone can come up with a good note or format then I think we need to create something that works for this league. Rikster2 (talk) 15:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Rikster, but "accommodate this difference" how? I agree completely with your description of the issue and the prevalence of WNBA players who also play for non-WNBA teams, but question the solution. What is the harm in having a single career history with overlapping tenures for WNBA and foreign teams? This would seem to be the simplest, if not the most elegant, resolution. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:13, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Right now the basketball infobox has a clear chronology of teams (which can contain duplicates for multiple tenures with the same team) that can be followed down the list very easily. Introducing overlapping tenures to this makes it very difficult to follow. I wasn't around when the WNBA box was created, but it was created with this league difference in mind and is clear and easy to follow. Much like we added the "pba_draft" fields to accommodate merging the Philippine Basketball Association box, I think we need to consider carefully how to make this work or consider not merging the templates. We could just as easily make some tweaks to the WNBA box that enables better flow between the leagues but maintains separate boxes. Not saying that is what we should strive for, but it is still an option. Rikster2 (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Rikster, I don't want to be hypocritical, because I have advocated separate player infoboxes for different levels of the same sport or very similar sports when I believed the circumstances warranted separate templates (e.g., college football vs. NFL vs. CFL). Perhaps what we need to see are mock-ups of the various career history solutions for WNBA players who have also played abroad. If we cannot make WNBA/foreign career history work in the framework of the merged Infobox basketball biography, then let's say so: we can make two separate infobox templates with nearly identical appearance, and very similar coding, but for the career history -- if that is necessary. This may be an example where separate templates work better for the WNBA and most other leagues, but let's see if we can create the mock-ups and make an informed decision based on something more than opinion. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

I know little about women's basketball, but are the overseas leagues of WNBA players significant to their notability? A good number of MLB players play in winter leagues, but they are not added to their infobox. (As an aside, the more I see all the D-League entries for someone like Malcolm Thomas, the more I think that might be clutter also)Bagumba (talk) 08:02, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bagumba: - Short answer, yes it is significant to their notability. I think it is a mistake to use baseball and football as the model for player movement for basketball. Those sports are dominated by MLB and the NFL (and by North America in general). Basketball is more similar to soccer in the way players move teams because the sport is more of a global game. I will reiterate that the WNBA infobox was constructed differently because player movement for women is different (the WNBA was structured by its NBA parent to be a Summer League so it wouldn't compete with the men's league and players actually derive the bulk of their income in other countries) – I think it is a mistake to just say that isn't important so it fits more neatly into an infobox created solely with the men's game in mind. Last, while I disagree with you on the D-League issue, how about we hold that discussion for another day and instead concentrate on running this WNBA infobox issue, which has been outstanding for over a year, to the ground? Rikster2 (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
AFAIK, women's basketball players are paid more in Europe (and Australia?) than in the WNBA. The situation is actually unique since a player could have contracts for separate teams, something that can't be done on other sports. –HTD 14:09, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Career history options[edit]

  • Okay, I think we all have a grasp of the issues presented: WNBA is a summer league, and many if not most WNBA players also play in Europe or elsewhere during the WNBA off-season (the traditional basketball fall-winter-spring schedule played by most leagues). Thus, WNBA players are often under contract with a WNBA team and another non-WNBA team at the same time. The template issue is how best to present these overlapping team affiliations and career history in the player's infobox. As I understand it, there are basically three options:
1. Continuous, non-overlapping year spans for team tenures, for example:
2001           Atlanta Dream
2001–2002 Galatasaray S.K.
2002           Atlanta Dream
2002–2003 CSKA Moscow
2003           Atlanta Dream
2003–2004 CSKA Moscow
2004           Atlanta Dream
2004–2005 CSKA Moscow
2005           New York Liberty
2. Overlapping year spans for team tenures, for example:
2001–2004 Atlanta Dream
2001–2002 Galatasaray S.K.
2002–2005 CSKA Moscow
2005           New York Liberty
3. Separate career histories for WNBA and non-WNBA teams, for example:
WNBA
2001–2004 Atlanta Dream
2005           New York Liberty
Non-WNBA
2001–2002 Galatasaray S.K.
2002–2005 CSKA Moscow

Anyone should feel free to expand these examples with additional team tenures, if you think that would be helpful to illustrate the issues or potential solutions. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I think those are the right structure options (though the WNBA single seasons would display as "2002" vs. "2002–2002"). Although option #1 is consistent with how men's infoboxes display, I think it looks terrible for this case. To me, it comes down to option #2 or #3. Personally, I like #3 but could be convinced for #2 if we found a good way to have it flow smoothly. Rikster2 (talk) 15:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Option three is how it currently is, ex. Sue Bird. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 15:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it's definitely how the WNBA player infobox displays club history. What we are trying to determine is what it should look like if these articles were migrated to the more generic basketball biography infobox, as has been suggested. Is #3 your preference? Do you think any of the other options would work? Rikster2 (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 2 with a footnote. If we're preventing confusion, Option 3 is not better if the reader figures out that the playing years overlap. Option 1 implies successive one year contracts from multiple teams and this isn't almost usually the case. Adding a footnote would solve the problem, such as "WNBA seasons are held in the summer, when other women's basketball leagues are in the offseason." –HTD 16:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Rikster2 seemed to imply above (11:58, 7 January comment) that the WNBA does not dominate women's hoops at the global level. If that is the case, it seems undue to generically have a "WNBA teams" section followed by "Non-WNBA teams". And the ultimate design should accommodate players that didn't play in the WNBA. Ann Meyers played before the WNBA existed, so should not have a "Non-WNBA teams" header for her playing career. I assume the year-around league phenomena can apply to men's too? Ed O'Bannon played in Argentina and Greece leagues with overlapping tenures as well.—Bagumba (talk) 21:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
    • So one example. There are a few others (Australian NBL used to run in the Summer too). It does happen rarely in the men's world and can be handled on an exception basis. It is the norm for WNBA teams. What is your preference for how this is displayed, Bagumba, or did you just post to complain? (by the way, I doubt O'Bannon had overlapping tenures - more likely the start/end dates for the two teams were not known by whomever put them in so they just displayed the full season. I have to do that with CBA teams sometimes) Rikster2 (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I'm still getting familiar with women's basketball, so it's premature for me to just !vote. Here's some points that remain unclear to me:

  1. Why is "WNBA" and "non-WNBA" the proposed grouping? Is it because it is the most notable league for English readers, or because it is considered the top league world-wide? Other?
  2. If we are tailoring this for English readers, or the WNBA is the pre-eminent league, I'd lean towards not listing overlapping leagues, or list them in footnotes in the infobox. They can be fully discussed in the body. Perhaps include a visual display there of the timeline of their teams, similar to Timeline of the National Basketball Association.
  3. Template:Infobox basketball biography currently has one "Career history" section, with "As player:" and "As coach:" encoded in that section. Will that continue, or will there be dedicated playing and coaching career sections as with Template:Infobox WNBA biography? I don't think having "As player:" then "WNBA teams:" under a generic "Career history" will look good.
  4. Overlapping tenures might be a general problem for other leagues besides the WNBA. What about players from the American Basketball League, that started about the same time as the WNBA? I'm not saying don't allow two lists of teams like in Option 3, but let's design this so the section names are customizable e.g. "{{{primary league}}} teams" and "Non-{{{primary league}}} teams"
  5. WNBA coaches who played in leagues other than the WNBA should not have "Non-WNBA teams" for their playing career. This would be a problem with sticking with existing WNBA bio template.

Apologies if anyone finds this to be "complaining" as opposed to helping to find a solution for all (women's) basketball people.—Bagumba (talk) 22:44, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

No, that is furthering discussion not complaining. Thank you. On point #2 I am very much opposed to not showing the non-WNBA teams at all. If that's the direction just to make it work, just leave them separate, add the WNBA color palate to basketball biography for male players who become WNBA coaches and be done with it. Rikster2 (talk) 23:45, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
#2 for me was dependent on answers to #1. Keep it if we all agree that the non-WNBA teams that overlap are significant to their notability, not merely because it's a fact that they played on those teams.—Bagumba (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Not including teams that don't directly drive to the person's notability is not the way we currently treat basketball biography for men and I think if we have to treat women's players differently in order for them to "fit," then that probably means the two boxes shouldn't be merged. If you'd like to see a change in how we look at basketball biography globally (and your Malcolm Thomas comments tell me that you do), then we should stop this discussion and get consensus on how we want to use that infobox instead of trying to shoehorn that question here. But, yes, it is significant to Candace Parker's career that she has played for the last five years for a Russian team (and has in fact won a Euroleague championship with that club). This is a key part of her career history. Rikster2 (talk) 02:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Wouldn't exclude solely to make it fit. However, looking at your example of Candace Parker convinces me that some (if not all) non-WNBA are notable enough to be listed.—Bagumba (talk) 10:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment, There are a lot of non-WNBA women's players who use the basketball bio', see Category:Australian women's basketball players mostly (WNBL). Most of them have their career histories blank (maybe because there are overlapping careers and don't know how to list them or just don't feel like it) and some just use infobox sportsperson. There isn't really anything different about the WNBA and basketball infoboxes besides the WNBA and Non-WNBA careers. Quick comparison For different header options, it might be a good idea to be able to change the WNBA-career to a different league. Also, some footballers have like four headers, see Fabio Capello. It might also be a good idea to have a footnote or asterisk for overlapping teams. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Option 2 It's hard to see chronological order between WNBA and non-WNBA team in this case with Erin Phillips with Option 3. With Option 2, it's hard to see which teams overlap. As Option 3 isn't much of an improvement with its own set of issues, I think for editors it'd be more straight forward to just have one option, Option 2. Not sure how we would footnote if we were to follow HTD's suggestion.—Bagumba (talk) 10:23, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
I never understood how Option 3 solves things, if overlapping playing years is a problem. People would still find out that playing years overlap. Option 1 further misrepresents things. Option 2 with a footnote is the way to go. It still is a chronological (if you define it as when a player started) list of teams a player had played for. Perhaps a link to an explanation on an article (women's basketball?) would help. –HTD 18:23, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, I can get on board with option 2 (though it isn't perfect by any means). Can somebody play around with how this would look for a more complex case like Penny Taylor, though? I am having trouble envisiniong which teams would go first, etc. Also, can we get agreement that my suggestions #1 (draft fields) and #3 (Women's basketball HOF flag) should be added? The WNBA profile would be nice, but not necessarily a need to have day 1 in my opinion. Rikster2 (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

I guess everyone agrees on having the draft fields, HOF flags and WNBA profiles. I dunno what'll be the problem in adding the WNBA profile right now instead of later. As for Penny Taylor, it'll go like this:
  • Dandenong Rangers (1998-2002)
  • Cleveland Rockers (2001-03)
  • Termocarispe La Spezia (2002-03)
  • Famila Schio (2003-07)
  • Phoenix Mercury (2004-07)
  • UMMC Ekaterinburg (2007-09)
  • Phoenix Mercury (2009-11)
  • Fenerbahçe Istanbul (2009-13)
  • Phoenix Mercury (2013-present)
Also I'd say to keep separate spells on one team as separate appearances in the infobox, just as what they do for soccer players. –HTD 18:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Template updates for WNBA[edit]

The following parameters have been added to Template:Infobox basketball player:

  • draft_league
  • wnba_profile
  • womensHOF

Documentation has been updated. The only thing that hasn't been done are integrating the WNBA team colors. For that, Template:WNBA color needs to be integrated into Module:Basketball color. Don't know when I'll get to playing around with that. If someone else wants to take a stab, or perhaps User:Frietjes can help out. In the meantime, try the new params out on some retired WNBA players, where the colors aren't needed.—Bagumba (talk) 01:09, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Nationality in infobox[edit]

Steve Nash is a dual citizen. You are invited to help form a consensus on how his nationality should be presented in the bio's infobox. Please comment at Talk:Steve_Nash#Nationality_in_infobox. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 22:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

247sports.com for recruiting[edit]

I've noticed an increasing number of edits adding 247sports recruiting information (and in some cases deleting Scout.com). Anyone know why this is? And for some (like this edit to Damian Lillard), the recruiting rankings are being listed for years prior to what the main 247Sports.com article says is its founding date of 2010. I am a little worried there may be a spamming ad campaign going on here. Anyone have more insight into this site? My experience has been that Scout and Rivals (and later ESPN) were the most prominent recruiting rankings, but also know that 247Sports is more recently affiliated with CBSSports.com so I am guessing it at least is becoming legit. But should Wikipedia be "leading" that rise to respectability or following once it is established? Comments? Rikster2 (talk) 21:38, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

247Sports is legitimate. I think it's surpassed ESPN recruiting and now is on par with and arguably better than Rivals and Scout. 247Sports should be included in the recruiting rankings tables in addition to the other three. -AllisonFoley (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Due weight should be the guiding principle. Are independent sources mentioning 247? If so, is it enough to warrant mention with the other major ones?—Bagumba (talk) 23:40, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
This ESPN article mentions rating for all four agencies, including 247. USA Today called 247 one of the " four major recruiting services".[4] I'm satisfied.—Bagumba (talk) 00:08, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

What about the rankings prior to 2010 when the site was launched (like Damian Lillard and Trevor Booker)? Where do those ratings even come from? That's actually my bigger issue - Scout and rivals info is being replaced. I know Scout and Rivals were operating pre-2010. Rikster2 (talk) 02:19, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Not sure. If you question it, you can removed it as unreliable for anything before 2010 launch, and leave link to this discussion in the edit summary.—Bagumba (talk) 01:57, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Countries and infoboxes[edit]

I propose that, in case someone adds a country next to the team a certain player has played in the past, one adds the words "2nd", "3rd", "4th" et. al. right next to the team's country, of course with a link to said league. F.E.:
Player X played last year for, let's say CB Prat. This is a team from the Spanish LEB Oro, the second tier of the Spanish basketball league system, so, his infobox would go something like this:

Of course, only if the league is on a second or lower tier. If that guy, say, went to Baloncesto Málaga, a team from the Liga ACB, the Spaniard first tier level, it wouldn't be necessary to add "1st", it would be like this.

The reason for this would be that teams in several FIBA leagues, specially at Europe, tend to play on promotion/relegation systems and this way the reader not only would have an idea of where that player has been playing, but also, of what kind of basketball kind of level has he been playing, which is, in my opinion, useful information. I know some of you might think that most wouldn't know what it is referring to, but I believe most readers could infer without much difficulty that it means levels or tiers and with the link there, they would be a little more encouraged to investigate, to inform themselves more about the subject. I've actually been told that it might overload the infobox, but, being quite honest, save for very few cases, three or four extra characters don't make that much of a difference and it they did, we could substitute "2nd" "3rd" "4th" for just "2" "3" "4" What would you guys think of this, what would you propose? Intruder007 (talk) 03:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I think we should follow WP:IBX re: infoboxes: "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." I'm wary of adding information that won't generally be verifiable in a bio. The info at best will be in the team article, but I find little with citations in a lot of those articles. I don't think it's intuitive if the 1st, 2nd, etc is in relation to the country, or some sort of world rankings. There is no key, and doubt there is room to add a labeled column. Finally, there was an earlier concern that even a lot of the leagues were often not linked correctly from the country.—Bagumba (talk) 04:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
2nd-3rd-4th, I don't think it is as vague, specially if just put our minds into writing the right link, and most of the league articles say in the first or second paragraph which level on said country's pyramid it is, so it wouldn't be that hard for the reader to confirm that info and about the leagues not being linked correctly, that would be more of the editors' fault (it's one of the reasons I dislike redirects). To help that, we could, for example, open a thread in one of the wiki talk pages listing the different leagues with their proper levels and the correct leagues. I know it might sound a bit ambitious, but it can be done and wold be quite helpful. Intruder007 (talk) 05:13, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, only basketball athletes lists the country of the league in the infobox; other sports don't. While I like this feature, having another field for it's level on the pyramid might be a tad too much. Also, some countries don't have proper "pyramids" so if we'll be doing this for those countries, it would be made up. –HTD 16:39, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
In the case of countries with no pyramids, I guess it would depend. If it only has a single league, that would be no problem, it just wouldn't have a number and if it were countries with different leagues that are not arranged like that, we could just write the initials of the league, for example Japan has the bj league and the NBL, but both leagues are alternate, no promotion or relegation, akin to the NFL and AFL on the 60's. To fix that, we could have two options.
And in case we had any sort of doubt, we could use this template as a basis: Template:Professional Basketball Leagues. Intruder007 (talk) 21:53, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Here's where I am on this: I think adding the league or country is trying to cram a lot into a relatively small space and I don't add this info when I create articles on contemporary players today. That said, I am not that hard over on it so I usually just leave whatever formatting already exists on existing articles I edit. I think the information is somewhat useful, but once you get into the nuances of how to display (for example, what link do you use to "Spain" if a played was with a club through 2-3 relegation/promotion actions?) it is "more trouble than it's worth." Tenure and team seems sufficient, especially if the team has a Wikipedia article that a reader could click to if they weren't familiar with the league (and the stint should be in the article with more exposition anyway). Like I said, I am pretty ambivalent about which way to go. However, I am not ever in favor of adding "NBA" after NBA teams. It is the top league in the world, and the only one I know of that has a worldwide TV contract. Rikster2 (talk) 14:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I strongly oppose adding anything to these already lengthy infoboxes that will potentially add another line of text to them. At present, virtually all team names and tenures can be stated on a single line of text within the infobox. With the addition of leagues and countries, team tenures are often going to require two lines of infobox text -- and this is an unnecessary extravagance. Infoboxes are not supposed to include every factoid (and more) included in the main body text; they are not a bullet-point restatement of the article in every detail. League and countries can easily be stated in the text; squeezing them into an already lengthy and cramped infobox ignores the primary purpose of what infoboxes are supposed to do: focus on the core, at-a-glance data, not regurgitate the entire article minus verbs and adjectives. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:35, 24 January 2015 (UTC)