Talk:2023 FIBA Basketball World Cup

Qualified teams
Its general consensus to wait till after the last edition of the event is finished to add qualified teams. In this case this means until after the 2019 World Cup. So the teams should not be listed. We also do not have official confirmation on the qualification teams and if the hosts will have an automatic berth. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

2023 FIBA Basketball World Cu
As per MOS standards host countries are to be listed in alphabetical order. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:50, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


 * @Sportsfan 1234 I see that this is why you are alphabetizing the host nations in the infobox. Can you specifically link it though? Because I genuinely cannot find this. If there is actually something said about this, then I say implement it in other articles, such as 2002 FIFA World Cup. Engr. Smitty   Werben 03:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * PhilSports Arena UAAP 2010.jpg

Additional 17-32 classification round tables
There has to be four more tables for ranks 17-20, 21-24, and so on. The UEFA national team qualifying tournaments has an example of this. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * hi 114.108.219.164 (talk) 05:08, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Final standings
The classification rules state that the first rule of ranking is the position in the group, so does it mean it should be the Philippines at 1-4 is the 24th and not Mexico at 2-3? 58.69.75.1 (talk) 09:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Serbian player kidney operation
Clearly there is consensus to include the reaction by the South Sudan Basketball federation under this section. However, an IP continues to edit war without a valid reason. Just starting this section to get others opinions. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Where is consensus? Where is edit-warring? Statement by South Sudan about comments on social media is not relevant to the real issue of player losing kidney in foul play. Section is about that not social media reaction. 91.148.80.223 (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Consensus is you have been reverted by multiple editors (I count 3 including myself). You have reverted the edits 5+ times without even discussing. The social media reaction IS RELATED to the injury received by the Serbian player. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * That is not consensus. Learn first what consensus is. Of those three editors one is you, who tried to have protection of page increased instead of discussing it and reaching consensus. Once admin told you there is no edit-warring and that it's content dispute you backed off - see here . Other user is someone who was inactive for 5 years until yesterday. You yourself have reverted 4 times without discussing it. Social media reaction has nothing to do with a player losing his kidney and that is what this part of article is about. 91.148.80.223 (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll restate my position here once again. In my opinion, the statement of the South Sudan Federation is clearly tangentially related to kidney operation incident - the player received backlash for his foul play. This is not to downplay on the incident itself. Its just stating the domino effect of whatever happened. I am not convinced of its irrelevance on my part.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 15:08, 19 September 2023 (UTC)