Talk:Fab Five

Untitled

Smack, I appreciate the changes you're trying to make here -- I participated in the disambiguation discussions for the MoS, but I think this particular page needs a little more explanation for its entries. There's not much on the individual articles about "the fab fives" or why they were named that way, nor should there be -- this page is a good place to provide these small details. It may be good to trim some of them a bit, or to remove the picture, but I think this is one Dab page which might be considered half-article. — Catherine\^talk 22:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

You're right that there isn't much on the individual articles about the "fab fives". I also admit that I'm biased against sports and entertainment articles, so I may have been careless in removing material from here and not restoring it where it belongs. However, this is not the place to resolve these problems. According to the MoS, disambigs have no business distracting the reader with this kind of material. It says, The primary purpose of the disambiguation page is to help people find the page they want quickly and easily.

For an example of a disambig that could delve into etymological tidbits, but chooses not to, see Daedalus (disambiguation). (It's hardly a model of MoS conformance, but it does illustrate my point. Also, note that I've never edited it.) The abundance of things called 'Daedalus' is no coincidence; they're all named for the mythological character. Few of the articles say anything about what the various Daedali have to do with the original Daedalus - but the disambig keeps its silence as well, and it's much the better for it. --Smack (talk) 16:39, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Most of the Fab Fives on this disambiguation page have specific pages (i.e. Duran Duran on the Duran Duran page). The two sports groups do not. I don't know much about the Brisbane Lions, but just surfing, I was expecting an actual Fab Five page for the Michigan basketball team. I would add one if it seems like a good idea, but i was just looking something up, so I don't know much. --nalin35 23:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Completely agree that there should be a Fab Five page for Chris Webber et al. from the Michigan Basketball team. I can't believe an obsessed person hasn't started one yet. There should be no end of references out there. This disambiguation page isn't very useful by linking to general articles.--Skoch3 05:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

yall should make a page about the The Fab 5 from the Michigan University Basketball Team

This page is becoming fancruft, as seen by that Fab Four (Is somebody missing a finger?) that only played five minutes of good Finals basketball. After checking for an existing article, I will stub a U-M article, if needed. This page should seriously consider being renamed as a disambiguation.MMetro (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Bad link

The link to *Willie Mcgee* in the following paragraph is misleading:

" The Akron Fab Five, who won a national high school basketball championship, best known to be Lebron James's high school. There is also a book about them that James wrote, Shooting Stars , and a movie, More Than a Game

Lebron James, Dru Joyce, Sian Cotton, >>>>>Willie Mcgee<<<<<, and Romeo Travis"

The link is taking you to the Baseball player Willie Mcgee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.62.197.222 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 5 July 2010

 Fixed. Station1 (talk) 23:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup needed

Per discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation/Archive_25#dab_page_for_neologism_of_multiple_sports_teams, a disambiguation page should point to other articles about specific Fab Fives, and should not list each member of the various incarnations. The various Fab Five entries are subject to WP:NEO. They should be made into separate articles if notable per WP:NEO, and then this dab page should disambiguate the new article(s). If its not worthy of a separate page, it should be removed from this page. —Bagumba (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

That's not an acceptable rule of thumb. There will be readers seeking other topics under the name "Fab Five"; there's no reason to leave them hanging just because we don't have a unique article for that particular use. Powers ^T 03:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:NEO, the entry might be more suitable for Wiktionary. Imagine if a term was not part of an existing disambiguation page, there is no way an article with a one line definition would not be deleted. Similarly, a disambiguation should not be a dumping ground for defining terms without articles (or sections in the articles) about the term. MOS:DABENTRY is specific about only one link per entry, not five individual links to so-called "Fab Five" members that shed no information on the group "Fab Five".—Bagumba (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

The 1948 Kentucky Wildcats should be included

I don't get what's the problem with including the 1948 Kentucky Wildcats men's basketball team--the ORIGINAL "Fabulous Five". They not only won the school's (and Rupp's) first championship, but also the Olympic gold medal. They were the "Fab Five" long before the 1993 Michigan team, who in fact got their title stripped by the NCAA a few years later.75.81.197.59 (talk) 03:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

The 1948 Kentucky Wildcats men's basketball team, the first championship for both the school and coach Adolph Rupp, and also would win an Olympic gold medal that same year.

The problem with the proposed entry above is that neither Kentucky Wildcats nor Adolph Rupp mentions nothing about Fab Five. Also, per MOS:DABENTRY, only one blue link should exist per entry. After doing some research, it seems that "Fabulous Five" is the term usually associated with the 1948 Kentucky team, not "Fab Five". There is also an existing article, Fabulous Five (Kentucky Wildcats). Without quibbling about whether Fab Five is often used to describe the 1948 team, I propose to include Fabulous Five (Kentucky Wildcats) under the "See also section" per WP:MOSDAB#"See also" section —Bagumba (talk) 06:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Also, the text needs to be shortened as it should not be a dictionary definition per WP:DABNOT —Bagumba (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I just figured it was common sense that "Fab Five" is short for "Fabulous Five". I guess putting it in the "See Also" section makes sense. It just seems grossly unfair that the '48 Cats are not included when they were the Fabulous/Fab Five long before the 1993 Michigan team (which in fact got their nickname/runner-up title stripped by the NCAA).75.81.197.59 (talk) 18:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not for righting great wrongs. It's for subjects which are notable, which "Fabulous Five" seems to be. It's more new school to call it "Fab Five" in reference to Kentucky, but it doesnt seem to be used often, so seems like a neologism which makes it a word to watch in WP. The Kentucky team had its own point-shaving scandal, so neither team is without faults, but that is irrelevant for notability. —Bagumba (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

2012 Olympics

What is the convention for the order of the list? Right now during the Olympics when people refer to the Fab Five they are referring to the Gold medal winning U.S. Women's Gymnastics team and that is most likely what people are searching for. The University of Michigan Men's basketball team should likely be second because of the cultural impact and importance but it is not on the front page of TODAY's sports pages. -JL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.87.237.180 (talk) 14:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Typically they are not moved around to reflect news spikes, as it will likely never be properly updated if it ever becomes less popular. I prefer to avoid recentism and stick with a long-term outlook without speculating on future notability. The basketball team was from 1991, has a full article with sources about the term, and gets a fair amount of hits. The gymnastics term at this point is just a generic link to the Olympic team's roster list with no prose about the term Fab Five or the group as a whole. At this point, it appears to be a neologism being used by NBC to promote their broadcasts. I doubt there are many sources outside of recent news that use the term in this context.

I have no interest in getting into an edit war as its relatively minor; the key is that readers have an available list of possible matches of Fab Five. You can either move the basketball team back to the top, or we can reassess this after the Olympics have completed. Also, if anyone can add prose about the gymnastics group and the origin and significance of the term "Fab Five", that is what readers are truly looking for. —Bagumba (talk) 16:06, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

It seems like Fierce Five is now the WP:COMMONNAME. Moving them below the basketball team.—Bagumba (talk) 16:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I am okay with them being below the University of Michigan Basketball team as that will likely have more staying power. However, I do have a problem with the current language that reads "earlier name for the Fierce Five" That is just false. Most people still call them the fab five. Some Michigan Basketball fans tried to get the Fierce Five to catch on but it never did. -JL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.44.22.103 (talk) 01:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Gymnastics Fierce Five in 2016

The last time anyone called that team the Fab Five was in 2012. Also the first time. Putting that article in this list was pure WP:RECENTISM, and leaving it there is a mistake. For a recent article about the team, see this one. It even mentions the "Fab Five" idea was shot down within the team itself. Certainly, the unsourced claim "Most people still call them the fab five" in the discussion four years ago isn't true now (if it was ever true).

I'm suggesting removing the Fierce Five link from the list and putting that into the "See Also" section. It's the more appropriate place for an article that doesn't have the same name but is related in a tangential way. Rockypedia (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation page are meant to get readers to the article they want. It's neither here nor there if they remember a dated term, just get them the information they are seeking. eonline.com wrote on July 11, 2016: "The Fierce Five (or Fab Five, depending on who you ask) ..." [1] Right or wrong, it's not totally unexpected some people would still know them as "Fab Five". I believe the entry should instead remain in the main disambiguation area, not in the "See also" section as was moved with an edit summary as "uncontentious" after less than half a day with no response.[2] "See also" is meant for misspellings, or terms commonly confused. Fab Five is neither for the gymnastics team, as it is a former name for the group mentioned in the lead of Fierce Five. As such, I would recommend something similar to the James Carrey example at MOS:DABREDIR. Namely, list the term in the disambiguation page title, then mention the more common term, e.g. "Fab Five or Fierce Five, the United States women's artistic gymnastics team at the 2012 Summer Olympics".—Bagumba (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)