Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association/Archive 29

Contextual inclusion of 2015 HoF Inductees in HoF sections of Team Articles
The eleven members of the 2015 Basketball Hall of Fame were announced in February and will be inducted in September. http://www.nba.com/2015/news/02/14/hall-of-fame-2015-finalists-announced/ http://www.hoophall.com/the-class-of-2015/
 * Louie Dampier
 * John Isaacs
 * Lindsay Gaze
 * Tom Heinsohn
 * George Raveling
 * Dick Bavetta
 * John Calipari
 * Spencer Haywood
 * Dikembe Mutombo
 * Jo Jo White
 * Lisa Leslie

Multiple edits have been made primarily to include the 2015 inductees within the Hall of Fame section of corresponding NBA team articles. These edits are being removed by an editor, apparently under a banner of the induction ceremony not yet having occurred.

My proposed middle-ground is placing a sentence at the bottom of the team article's Hall of Fame section, noting the player has been elected as a member to the Hall of Fame, with induction to occur in September. The primary distinction being the inductee is not co-mingled in the list of existing HoF members (typically a table or bullet list) to avoid confusion.

This would have the general appearance of:

Hall of Fame
 * Player Name Pos, 19xx-xx, Inductied Class of 19xx
 * Player Name Pos, 19xx-xx, Inductied Class of 19xx
 * Player Name Pos, 19xx-xx, Inductied Class of 19xx
 * Player Name Pos, 19xx-xx, Inductied Class of 19xx

Player Name (player for the TEAM from 20xx-xx) was elected into the Hall of Fame in 2015; He will be inducted in September. 

Feedback? UW Dawgs (talk)
 * It's not OFFICIAL until the ceremony takes place. It's the same with retired numbers. When Team X announces that they will retire Players X's number and you add it to the Retired numbers table of that team it gets removed instantly. Even if you include a note – 1 Player X jersey will be retired on December 10, 2016 – it still gets removed. I keep reverting your edits with this Hall of Fame thing, because the same thing, what you want to do, happened to me in the past and it always got reverted. I think the best solution would be to add that player and hide him with  until September 11 and then these things can be removed  . – Sabbatino (talk) 08:16, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * This sort of pedantry does not improve the encyclopedia. You also engaged in edit wars on numerous articles over whether the current season was 14-15 or 15-16 that likewise was not helpful in improving the encyclopedia. I would ask you in the future to please stop wasting people's time with trivial nonsense like this. I support what UW Dawgs proposed and disagree strongly with your pedantic objections. Handpolk   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  08:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * And I support the long standing standards. And speaking of trivial, you're the one who makes everything trivial. My edits are more helpful then your nonsense when you write things that don't have their place in somewhere. And I again see that you have difficulties with reading comprehension so there's no discussion possible with you. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * And how dare you come here and write something without any relevance to the subject? Do you want to get reported for personal attacks? I sure can report you so you would beg for my mercy. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Pointing out your recent editing history is not a personal attack. However you saying "you have difficulties with reading comprehension" is a personal attack. You writing two paragraphs about me personally and not about content is also a violation of policy. If you carry on like this, you will find yourself blocked. Handpolk   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  11:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Retired numbers (and birthdays per your earleir comments) are irrelevant. If you are trying to advance an existing policy argument, please explicitly cite the policy.  The draft language specifically addresses your stated concern about commingling of both states of officially elected vs officially inducted. Cheers. UW Dawgs (talk) 18:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Sabbatino or anyone else - There has been no substantive opposition to appropriately-qualified inclusion this undisputed content, less the vague representation that it is against policy and/or precedent, which would be a valid reason. Please do locate and cite this policy. Cheers. UW Dawgs (talk) 20:58, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, these people are elected to HOF, but not inducted until September 11. For example, Retired numbers policy is as follows – player's jersey number is added to Retired numbers table AFTER the actual ceremony. Same thing always applied to HOF inductees, because there were a couple of times that I added HOF inductee before the actual date and it got reverted without no discussion and this policy was always stated as the reason. I tend to follow this policy. I won't remove the inductees that were noted in some of the articles. You might have noticed that I created HOF tables for a lot of the teams and didn't remove those inductees, but I didn't add them to the table neither. My proposition for the policy would be – don't add something until the actual event takes place. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Sabbatino Again, please cite (provide a link) to support your claim that this is existing policy.
 * Same thing always applied to HOF inductees, because there were a couple of times that I added HOF inductee before the actual date and it got reverted without no discussion and this policy was always stated as the reason. Apparently this previously put you in exactly my boat, agreeing that the appropriatel-qualified content was relevant and an editor reverted you without discussion.  Therefore, pease cite, cheers. UW Dawgs (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Just finished scrolling through my whole Wikipedia editing history and couldn't find it. And when I looked at the date of my first edit, I realised that for about 1–1,5 years before creating an account here, I was already editing Wikipedia. Those edits might have been reverted, because I was an IP user. Therefore I can't provide you with that policy. Sorry. But we can try and set a new policy, because that's why we're here, aren't we? – Sabbatino (talk) 15:31, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I could go either way. There are reasonable arguments on both sides. We should not however baldly indicate that any of these are now in the HOF. They have all, however, been voted into the HOF. Epeefleche (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether of not there was a previous consensus, consensus can change. It seems like a technicality whether a person has been formally inducted versus recently elected. I'm not aware of any elections that did not result in an induction. Therefore, I think some leeway can be afforded here, unlike cases like contracts where a verbal agreement is not binding and have been reneged,  and a formal signing of a written agreement is the higher standard expected. I think it's reasonable to list elected members with the caveat that they are distinguished (e.g. footnote) from those that have been formally inducted. For an example in another sport, List of San Diego Chargers Hall of Fame inductees has a footnote about the future induction of LaDainian Tomlinson.—Bagumba (talk) 16:24, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, it can change. And regarding the HOF induction, this is exatcly the reason (DeAndre Jordan anyone?) why I'm "fighting" over this. However I'm willing to accept what you proposed (adding a note). What do you think about this, User:UW Dawgs? – Sabbatino (talk) 16:32, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I disagree with co-mingling of footnoted electees with inductees, and prefer the format as proposed at top. The information is better presented as a brief statement below the table or list, with the player moving to visual parity when they have been inducted.  As there is no existing policy, the facts (electee status) are not in dispute, and multiple sources exist, I will begin re-adding the election comment and citation in the format noted above. Others are free to modify the formatting of the content as they see fit, per norms. UW Dawgs (talk) 21:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Proposition is proposition. I don't have any problems with your proposed idea at the top. At least there's some understanding in this matter. Cheers. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject NBA task forces
As a longtime Los Angeles Clippers supporter, I'm somewhat more attuned to articles about the Clippers, although my interest expands beyond that one team. I was curious about forming a Clippers task force but I hadn't really brought it up until now. However, as I was scouting around this morning, I noticed another editor on the project signup list that expressed a similar desire.

So, my question is would it be possible to set up a Clippers task force or is the WikiProject trying to get away from that because of the seeming appearance that the other task forces are somewhat inactive?

I've actually done a little advance work that I have stored in my user area, but I hesitated bringing it up until I detected some critical mass&hellip; not that two is critical mass.

--  Mikeylito  ► talk 09:48, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I have WikiProject National Basketball Association/Los Angeles Lakers task force watch listed but have never seen any activity there (even before the Jerry Buss era ended). What were you hoping a formal task force would provide?—Bagumba (talk) 10:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey, Bagumba! I admit I'm a little sensitive from the OTHER discussion but I hope you noticed I mentioned that I had observed that the other task forces were inactive. And why of all groups would you compare a Clippers task force to a Lakers' one?
 * Seriously, though, I can't speak for the other editor but all I want to do is support the mission of the WikiProject with a non-exclusive focus on the Clippers. For example, I researched and wrote the article Los Angeles Clippers Training Center and submitted it via the Articles for creation process because I wanted to see if I could learn anything from the process to help me be a better Wikipedian.
 * From what I've been able to observe, the task force process provides us with some tools to better identify which articles require editing in order to improve the articles. It doesn't hurt to break out some information specific to the Clippers that improves Wikipedia and helps with our self esteem.
 * Speaking only for myself, I'm kind of an NBA junkie; so, what I learn from nurturing articles related to the Clippers establishes a foundation that I can use on all NBA articles. Just this morning, I've been trying my hand at assessment on some unassessed articles related to the Clippers. Once I feel comfortable, I've noticed there's a pretty hefty backlog that the WikiProject needs help with.
 * Now, there also seems to be some overhead with setting up a task force which is why I haven't broached the subject before. However, if we can create that critical mass I referred to earlier, I'd like to know if the WikiProject is willing to support us.
 * Anyway, I apologize if I'm too verbose, It's a bad habit, but as always, thanks for giving me the opprtunity to explain myself.--  Mikeylito  ► talk 11:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If anyone thought a task force would be helpful, I wouldn't really care if it got created. I only notice that most talk page's for task forces are fairly idle, which is not to say that the tracking features that you mentioned are not actively being used.  It's hard to gauge.  All the relevant pages would need to be tagged, which I guess a bot request could be made, but note that even this project still has plenty of historic players and coaches that are not tagged.—Bagumba (talk) 18:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

A NBA vs. an NBA
Hi, guys, I've recently noticed that there is several pages using "a NBA". However, as you may know, it should be "an NBA" because of its pronunciation. I started to do some changes but I realized that there are too many occurrences for a individual to correct it manually. Is there a way to have a bot doing it? Cheers, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 18:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * There's AWB.—Bagumba (talk) 18:29, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Spurs #12 jersey
This needs to be decided whether Bowen's #12 is retired, unretired or "unretired". My position is that his jersey is "unretired" and should be left on Spurs' and Bowen's pages. Any opinion is welcome. Cheers. – Sabbatino (talk) 07:27, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The honor of it being retired does not go away, even if Bowen gave permission for it to be released for Aldridge to wear. Still, a note or footnote can't hurt, as it will inevitably be a source of mild edit warring otherwise.—Bagumba (talk) 08:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly. There already is a note, but some people still tend to disagree and do as they feel when they remove it from Bowen's and Spurs' pages. – Sabbatino (talk) 10:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

NBPA Players Awards
2015 NBPA Players Awards was recently created, that has all the candidates and winners for each of the NBPA Players Awards in 2015. I'm thinking an annual article might be excessive, as we don't have separate articles by season for the official NBA awards, and we only list the winners for the NBA awards, not a vote breakdown. I'd propose to merge 2015 NBPA Players Awards into NBPA Players Awards, and have the general article list all the winners for each season going forward. If it is important enough to have all the awards for an individual season together, it can be placed in a season article e.g. 2014–15 NBA season.—Bagumba (talk) 08:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * First off. thank you for inviting me to this conversation. I appreciate the opportunity to explain my thought process.


 * Considering the illusory and some transient nature of these awards, I felt it necessary to split the discussions into two articles: one which was generally static and explained the evolution of the NBPA's process and a second which listed, to use the union's terminology, the top vote getters. Since it seems from all available information that the players could vote for anyone that they wanted, it seems reasonable to list the top vote getters as released by the NBPA.


 * I can give three brief examples. First, the ridiculous wringing of hands that James Harden was selected over Stephen Curry despite the fact that the margin of victory was only one vote, a fact as yet I haven't included in the article. Secondly, the omission of Kawhi Leonard among the players top five votes is, to me, significant.  Lastly, upon learning the categories that the players were voting on, there was press speculation that Doc Rivers would win the coaching category. Like Leonard, he didn't appear among the top four.


 * At this stage, we don't know whether or not these awards will continue, whether their format,  categories and methodologies will change, remain the same or abandoned. That's why I felt it was important to keep the information distinct rather than folded into other articles. We can always change the format or reduce the amount of information later.


 * Anyway, that's my rationale. I'm sure I'll be hearing from the assembled.


 * --  Mikeylito  ► talk 09:37, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. There would be an inherent inconsistency with the more notable, official NBA awards like NBA Most Valuable Player Award, which currently do not track the top vote-getters for each year.  Is it notable enough in the long term to have it there also, or is it WP:FANCRUFT?—Bagumba (talk) 09:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I note the inconsistency between what I wrote and the official NBA awards. I'd like to point out, however, to do the same thing with the NBPA awards, we'd have to have eight to ten separate articles without any idea whether the categories and criteria are going to be persistent. There's already talk of such awards being folded into a league-administered NBA Honors ceremony a la the NFL Honors program. Under those circumstances, I could foresee collapsing three articles into one.  Likewise, if the current methodologies persist for, say, five years, I could see re-writing the articles to parallel the "official" awards.


 * As for WP:FANCRUFT&hellip;, I didn't think so, but if you do, I'm sure you're prepared to execute the remedy.
 * --  Mikeylito  ► talk 10:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * To be clear, I'm proposing to merge 2015 NBPA Players Awards into NBPA Players Awards, where each award can have its annual winners listed. This would be consistent with WP:AVOIDSPLIT. If the list of candidates for each award is deemed notable, place it in 2014–15 NBA season or other NBA season article.  I'm not advocating separate articles for each NBPA award.—Bagumba (talk) 10:13, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * How deep before we outdent?
 * I don't know. Clearly, I thought the information was distinct enough that I wrote two separate articles. I had considered writing only one article but I thought the voting methodology and the surrounding controversy were notable enough that it required an establishing article and an annual article, which is really more of a list.
 * To this point, I hadn't written about any of the controversy because I'm struggling with WP:NPOV and I want to have good references for anything I write.
 * Clearly, I'm not changing your mind and you're not changing mine. So, hopefully we'll hear some other opinions. For the record, I don't think the Players Awards are less notable than the official awards. In fact, their notability rises from the mere fact that the players felt they needed their own awards, We'll see what develops.
 * Thanks again for the opportunity.--  Mikeylito  ► talk 10:42, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't look like we have a consensus here (or any more participation). Any more thoughts on applicability of WP:AVOIDSPLIT here?—Bagumba (talk) 00:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Jahlil Okafor's ancestors by way of a non-WP:RS
At Jahlil Okafor, has insisted that a website that may not even be a WP:RS but that documents that the name Okafor has specific tribal origins is a sufficient source to add the category that documents that Okafor is descended from that tribe (Category:American people of Igbo descent). In the past, we use to require that content in an article have an inline citation documenting race. In this case, there is no attempt to add cited content to satisfy WP:V and it is possible that no WP:RS exists regarding the matter. If WP is a tertiary source summarizing reliable secondary sources, do we want this type of category addition?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Per WP:V, if it's challenged, it requires a source. I personally don't spend too much time on categories, especially when WP:DEFINING is so subjective.—Bagumba (talk) 17:52, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It was challenged and it was sourced in response. It's such a non-issue. Ipso facto if someone's name is Okafor they are Igbo (unless they married or were adopted into that name). It is a name in the Igbo language and a common name among the Igbo people. Someone else added the category and TonyTheTiger in a belitting manner to this "tribe" [sic] removed it. I admit the sources aren't great, but it's a silly thing to source, as it's a self-evident fact. Is Dostoevsky Russian? Is Yamada Japanese? If you googled "is Yamada Japanese" you would not get sources of a different quality than those silly websites as no serious journalist or academic would waste their time writing it. JesseRafe (talk) 20:06, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I haven't bothered to look at the edit history, but it wouldn't be readily apparent to me or most others what is or isn't an Igbo name. Even if this is a case of the WP:SKYISBLUE, edit warring would not be the answer (don't know if this was an issue or not); seek WP:DR.—Bagumba (talk) 20:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


 * ,, et al., when I first looked at the added content, I only noticed the category being added. Now, I see that there was (in the past) a WP:AGF effort to add WP:RS. This is most certainly not a WP:RS. This presents WP as a source and is thus a mirror and not a WP:RS. Thus the only question is whether this is a WP:RS. Currently, this page says "coming soon". Thus, the final source may be a WP:RS in the future. In fact, this page gives us hope that it may be. However, RS really comes down to expertise. Is there either an expert writer (a pereson who is him/herself an RS on the subject matter) or and expert editor of the writer (a person whose involvement in the editorial process leads us to presume that the sources can be trusted as reliable). Alternatively, do other sources refer to this source in a manner in which we can assume it is credible. I have removed all three sources and the content that is now unsourced. If you can present a source, the content is welcome.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

I saw your latest revert with edit summary: "Onus is on you to prove he is not Igbo then". However, per WP:NOCONSENSUS: "In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit. However, for contentious matters related to living people, a lack of consensus often results in the removal of the contentious matter, regardless of whether the proposal was to add, modify or remove it." At best, there is no consensus to add the Igbo text, and I will be removing it for now. Please gain consensus here for it's addition. Follow WP:DR if needed. Thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 15:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The bold edit was TonyTheTiger removing a category. The addition of text was just because Tony somehow expected a category to be cited. This is the status quo and his removal of a category he personally disagrees with should be discussed. Not the proper version of the page. JesseRafe (talk) 16:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Per WP:BRD, the bold edit was to add the cat on 12:24, 13 August 2015 (UTC), which was reverted shortly thereafter at 15:27.—Bagumba (talk) 16:41, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Pinging for additional input on adding the American People of Igbo Descent category. JesseRafe (talk) 16:24, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I was trying to find a source that directly referenced the ethnic origins of Jahlil Okafor but nothing came up, however Jahlil is a cousin of Emeka Okafor and there's a reliable source in the article concerning them being a part of the Igbo ethnic group. Logically, this would make Jahlil of Igbo descent assuming they are both from the Okafor family, although I can see why there would be grounds for concern over ancestry. Ukabia - talk 20:23, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , and, I apologize that I have been busy for a few days. I looked at the Emeka Okafor page and the sentence "His father, Pius Okafor, is a member of the Igbo ethnic group." is followed by a WP:IC from the seemingly reliable New York Times citation. However, the word Igbo does not seem to appear in this citation. Did I miss something? I don't mean to be a hardass, but we need WP:V on this subject, IMO.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:01, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , the article used the old spelling of Igbo (Ibo). "Pius Okafor arrived in the United States in August 1976 from Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation, rich in oil but wracked through the decades by colonialism, military dictatorship, ethnic strife and pervasive corruption. He carried $400 in his pocket and a student visa. Education was paramount in his Ibo ethnic group, he said, and to study overseas meant you were large." Pluse there are other sources I've just found by Nypost and The Times-Picayune Ukabia - talk 07:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I have restored the content with the valid WP:RS linkages.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Hall of Fame tables on team pages
Basketball team's typically honor their great players with a retired number. Is it WP:UNDUE to include a table of all players that played at least one game for the team that were also inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame? With modern free agency a lot of great players end up with short stints on various team during the twilight of their career. While it's a nice trivial fact that these Hall Of Famers played on all these teams, it's misleading because a lot of these were no longer great, or did not make significant contribution to the team's history. For example, Los Angeles Lakers lists players like Karl Malone, Gary Payton, Mitch Richmond, Dennis Rodman, all great players but nobody would call them great Lakers. Nobody's created one for the Boston Celtics yet, but do we really need to show Dominique Wilkins there? I think a retired number section is sufficient to list a team's historical greats, and Hall of Fame tables should be removed.—Bagumba (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * First of all, thanks for starting this discussion. Secondly, Retired numbers tables are there for a reason as they show that those particular players made a significant mark in that team. HOF tables just show that those players played for those teams (Celtics, Knicks, Lakers, etc.) and it doesn't mean they were great for that particular team. Of course, players like Julius Erving were left out of some HOF tables (Milwaukee Bucks), because he was just drafted by them, but didn't play a single match with them. As for removing HOF tables, do you want to remove them completely or just make them into lists? – Sabbatino (talk) 16:10, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ideally, there could be a way to easily sort or filter List of players in the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame to look for players from a particular team. That does not exist AFAIK. However, for readers who don't know much about basketball, these tables in team articles make the players appear more important to the team than they really are.  I would argue that providing due weight in the article's content to uninformed readers should have precedence over the presumably smaller group that are looking for this specific breakdown.  I'd like to find a better way to WP:PRESERVE it somehow, but I can't think of one.—Bagumba (talk) 16:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the Naismith article could be updated with a "Primary Team" column. UW Dawgs (talk) 17:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The Baseball Hall of Fame picks which team's cap is on a player's bust. Not sure if Basketball HOF has same concept.  If Wikipedias decide "primary team" on its own, it'd be WP:OR for borderline cases e.g. Dennis Johnson.—Bagumba (talk) 18:39, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The addition a "Season" "Seasons" or "Years" column to the Lakers table would certain help clarify each player's significance. As would fixing the structural flaw of using two "columns" of players within the table. UW Dawgs (talk) 17:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * While a "Season" column would add context, the fact remains that the truly impactful players are mostly duplicated by the retired numbers. Any other players are likely just trivia e.g. "Did you know that HOFer Robert Parish finished his career with one season with the Chicago Bulls?"—Bagumba (talk) 18:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Would it be acceptable to just refer to a team's all-time roster to find any HOFers e.g. Dallas Mavericks all-time roster and statistics leaders has them highlighted.—Bagumba (talk) 18:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Infobox Teams
Recently I've noticed that in current NBA players' infoboxes, the font stating the number and team, along with career information, history, and highlights and awards is white. I very clearly remember a player on the Knicks having the font be orange, a player on the Pacers having the font be yellow, a player on the Cavaliers having the font be yellow, a player on the Suns having the font be orange, and so on. I was wondering what you think about changing it back to the fonts being different colors because I think it fits the infoboxes better. For example, when I go to Carmelo Anthony and see his infobox being blue with an orange font it represents the Knicks more to me than having the font just be white. For some teams, having the font be white really makes the infoboxes look a lot worse and makes it look like it doesn't represent the team as well. So, to sum it up, I was hoping there was a way to change it back to make it not look so bland. Thanks. Miamiheat631 (talk) 20:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * For example, wouldn't Emmanuel Mudiay's infobox look so much better if the font was yellow? To me, it would just represent the Nuggets so much better than blue and white.  Or John Wall's if it had a dark blue font instead of just white?  Miamiheat631 (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Without looking into specific teams, I've seen some changes being made address WP:CONTRAST, i.e. some of those color combos may not be readable to readers with certain disabilities. Whatever colors are chosen, they need to have the proper contrast, which can be tested with some of the tools linked at the aforementioned guideline.—Bagumba (talk) 21:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * For those interested in making the colors more distinctive, another option is to incorporate one of the team colors as a border in the infobox. For example, see the NFL's Robert Griffin III, which has white text, but a yellow border.—Bagumba (talk) 21:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Some of the changes have been unnecessary. For example, the Warriors' gold on blue was no less readable than the current white on blue for those with disabilities. Somebody went too far with these and now every font is either white or black. Rikster2 (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If I use Snook's tool the yellow on blue was not compliant, but white on blue passed AA but not AAA. I suspect there's little traceability with the color changes made, and I'm worried we're going to see a lot of churn between editors. If people care enough, maybe we need to discuss a tighter process for updates.—Bagumba (talk) 22:33, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, now the colors don't represent the Warriors, it looks like the Pistons or 76ers. So I guess some solution is needed because I don't see the point of team colors if they aren't, you know, the team colors. Rikster2 (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I've made a related request at Template_talk:Infobox_basketball_biography. Feel free to comment there.—Bagumba (talk) 01:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there a way to change some of the colors for some teams? For example, I feel like an infobox for a player on the New Orleans Pelicans would fit better with a gold/yellow border rather than red.  Another example is I feel like an infobox for a player on the Portland Trail Blazers would fit better with a black fill and a red border.  I think it represents the team better and is more easily recognizable.  If there is any way to do that, it would be much appreciated if that could be shared with me.  Thanks.  --Miamiheat631 23:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Manual of Style / Infoboxes

 * Hello everybody. At WikiProject Basketball we have just started a Manual of style to bring the styles of all basketball articles in line with eachother.

In advance to this, I want to propose new infoboxes for NBA seasons pages, as there is one that is more basketball oriented (Template:Infobox basketball league season). The change would look something like this:

The Semifinalists parameters would be changed in Western and Eastern finalists, and also the Draft section would be added.

I would like to hear about your thoughts on this proposal! --H-Hurry (talk) 12:32, 22 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I'd go either way, but would've preferred "Games played" to be the actual number of games played by the league in a season (w/ or w/o playoffs). So that's way more than 82... – H T  D  20:18, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Instead of maintaining a separate template in Template:Infobox basketball league season, Template:Infobox sports season should be enhanced. In the worst case, Infobox basketball league season should be mostly a wrapper for Infobox sports season.—Bagumba (talk) 06:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Heh. As the creator of Infobox sports season, I'd be in favor of continuing its use. As for awards, I would've favored limiting it to the MVP, Rookie of the Year, and perhaps the Coach of the Year (coaches deserve some love too). – H T  D  20:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

New user's articles
Editors of WP:NBA might want to keep an eye on this user's new articles. I'm skeptical some of these coaches are notable. Jrcla2 (talk) 03:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I noticed that the Nicki Gross article also had a good deal of content that was simply cut-and-pasted from other sources. I trimmed it, though I bet there are similar problems with other articles. (And Gross' notability is still sort of iffy.) Zagal e jo^^^ 18:41, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The user has been creating NBA D-League head and assistant coaches, and they are all poorly done with little content and bad formatting. I've fixed two so far but I really can't be bothered with coach articles, let alone D-League coaches. Many likely do not notability guidelines, as the lack of references show. DaHuzyBru (talk) 02:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Underage medals
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Basketball regarding the listing in infoboxes of medals earned on underage national teams.—Bagumba (talk) 20:42, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

NBA video games
Are NBA video games a part of this WikiProject? I would think so but some are and some aren't so I'd like some clarification. This game is under this WikiProject's scope, whereas this one isn't. —DangerousJXD (talk) 02:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I personally don't track them, but maybe others do? I dunno, it seems about as tangential as tagging bios with WikiProjects of home states or country. Do you have a reason why they should or should not be there?—Bagumba (talk) 02:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * As stated above, I think NBA video games should be classified as being under this WikiProject's scope. They are related to the NBA after all. You could compare this to other subjects, such as comic books. This is a video game related to comics and it's classified as being under the scope of WikiProject Comics. —DangerousJXD (talk) 03:19, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I can't think of a real reason why video games based on the NBA shouldn't be included in the scope of this WikiProject. Should I go around placing the tag on articles? As I don't see a problem with it, I'll go tag a few articles. Should probably just disregard this section. —DangerousJXD (talk) 03:41, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

New York Knicks/Brooklyn Nets
Hi,

I want your opinion on this revision. As far as I remember, it was agreed that this kind of formation was/is inappropriate, but now some user decided that it's okay. Any thoughts? – Sabbatino (talk) 20:27, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What was the logic behind considering the other way "inappropriate"? They're both accurate ways of saying where they play. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:41, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think WikiProject New York City should have more guidance on this topic than we would here.—Bagumba (talk) 22:38, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Nik Stauskas injured or suspended?
Please comment at Talk:Nik_Stauskas if you know why he missed the final game of the 2015 FIBA Americas Championship.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:55, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Height and weight in metric
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball‎‎, which could change the units displayed first in the infobox of current and/or former NBA players.—Bagumba (talk) 20:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Anyone with an opinion on whether a non-American like Pau Gasol should have meters listed before ft is invited to join the discussion.—Bagumba (talk) 15:56, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Opinions needed - Brooklyn Nets franchise location
Please contribute your opinions at Talk:Brooklyn Nets. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 21:24, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Parameters for use of team colors for retired players working for NBA teams
Hello - Just had an exchange on Zydrunas Ilgauskas, the retired NBAer who now holds a front-office position with the Cavs (an assistant to the GM). We currently use the current team and league for members of the coaching staff, GMs and team presidents, but we probably need to chat about what the parameters are around this. There are many former players working as scouts, in front office positions and as community liaisons - should we be reflecting this as well? Personally, I've never been a fan of using the team colors/fields for people who aren't game day personnel (players and coaching staff), but I know others really think folks like Larry Bird, Phil Jackson and Michael Jordan should display this was – but to me these are at least the folks leading the franchise. My concern is not only is the affiliation not all that impactful below the top level, but there is more moving in and out of those jobs and who knows if it'd be updated in the infobox. Thoughts? Rikster2 (talk) 20:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Given there is a team parameter there, it's understandable that people might fill it in. Even if there was consensus not to fill it in and it was documented, people who don't read it (or don't care) are still going to fill it in every now and then. I doubt I'll be one to add it for these minor positions, but I personally wouldn't spend time bother deleting verifiable roles either.—Bagumba (talk) 19:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Detroit Pistons 1987–88 Eastern Conference champions
Template:Detroit Pistons 1987–88 Eastern Conference champions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Rikster2 (talk) 20:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Basketball pool?
I notice we have football pool and hockey pool, but we don't have a basketball pool; we do have fantasy football (association) and fantasy hockey, as well as fantasy basketball. Shouldn't we also have a basketball pool article? -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 06:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you have reliable sources indication that they are notable? I'm personally not familiar with it.—Bagumba (talk) 07:29, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure exactly what you have in mind, but there is an article about March Madness pools. That's probably the main context in which I'd think of "basketball" and "pools".
 * I'm surprised that hockey pool article has survived ten years. Is that even a distinct topic from fantasy hockey? Zagal e jo^^^ 04:39, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * A related discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball posed that paid daily fantasy leagues could be considered a pool of sorts. I would say it's not the common term at this point.—Bagumba (talk) 04:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Your input requested
There is a discussion on when to indicate a player's pro career is over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basketball that you are invited to participate in. Thanks. Rikster2 (talk) 23:55, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Mal (Jim?) McMullen
I've seen sources saying that Mal McMullen was taken in the 1949 BAA draft by Baltimore. But, basketball-reference says "Jim McMullen" was selected. I haven't found a smoking gun that indicates Mal McMullen's nickname was Jim. Can anyone confirm one way or the other? Jrcla2 (talk) 20:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I think bbr is wrong. It says "Jim McMullen" is from Xavier. There was no Jim McMullen at Xavier that year, but there was a "Mal McMullen" there. Rikster2 (talk) 21:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That's what I think, too. As great as bbr is, I find mistakes in it. Every other source I've seen (Xavier media guides, Kentucky sites like BigBlueHistory, etc.) point to Mal McMullen as the draftee. I'm going to be quasi-bold and add the draft info into the infobox. Jrcla2 (talk) 23:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not finding any evidence that there was an Xavier basketball player named Jim McMullen. This was probably an error that's been repeated in different sources over time; the APBR also lists Jim McMullen as the draft pick . Records from that era are probably sketchy. Zagal e jo^^^ 04:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Glenn Robinson III stats tables
I know that there are some guys who have mastered the stats tables. Glenn Robinson III could use some tables for both college and pro. I know I could do it, but I am not that efficient at doing it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:26, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I would always just copy the stats table from another article, and fill in the correct content. Zagal e jo^^^ 04:08, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ,, , and are people who I have seen do these tables on other pages that I watch. Can one of you help here.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and inserted the NBA stats but I'd prefer not to work with college player stats tables. I find them slightly more confusing. Somebody else can do that. —DangerousJXD (talk) 05:49, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

What basketball league players played in constantly being removed from articles and just replaced with the country they played in
On many basketball player articles, some editors remove what national league the player played in, and replace it simply with the name of the country. For example, if an article stated the player was playing in Turkey, in the first league in Turkey, Turkish Basketball Super League, or in the second league of Turkey, Turkish Basketball Second League, the article is then edited to just that the player played in Turkey. If you add what league the player played in, the edits are almost always reverted, as I have seen this over a long time happen in many articles. If you put what league the played played in back in the article, it gets removed again, with some explanations like the player played in more than one league, so you can't list it. Yet, each country has more than one league, so just saying they played in "Turkey" for example, is not detailed enough. The article should state what league also. For example, many articles now state a player "played in Spain", but give no info that they played in the first, second, third, or even fourth division in Spain. Just "played in Spain". References to having played in the fourth division, for example, rather than the actual main league of Spain are removed. This makes the reader think simply the time and league played was the first league of Spain, even if it was the 3rd or 4th league, which are minor and amateur leagues. Info stating not just what country the player played in, but also what league within that country that the player played in is pertinent and relevant, and it should not keep being removed. An exact analogy would be if no article on American NBA players ever stated the difference from when they might have played in the NBA D-League, the NCAA, and the NBA, and simply stated that "they played in the USA" their whole career. It's not accurate and it's not encyclopedic.Bluesangrel (talk) 21:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * the league flags are largely irrelevant and always have been. You add what division and it starts to become "Italy 1st/2nd" as teams get relegated/promoted. I vote we just get rid of them altogether, they add some value, but not enough to substantiate the extra lines in the infobox and discussions like these. I ALWAYS remove the "2nd" note on these because when we origninally had the discussion it was to show country not division, and the acronyms don't mean anything like "Continental Basketball Association" and "Chinese Basketball Association" both being "CBA." If we can't reach easy agreement just get rid of them all, there was never consensus to REQUIRE them. Rikster2 (talk) 22:07, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not what I am talking about Rikster. I am talking about in the articles themselves, within the actual paragraphs of the players playing career. I am having this issue become a major problem with the editor User:Bozalegenda. They are reverting all the edits I make to several articles and it seems this is nay article I edit that they are watching. The editor is citing over and over again this as an explanation. Even when my edits don't have anything to do with that. I am being told you cannot list any league a player played in within the article anywhere, unless it is the NBA. Or you have to list every league they played in, is the reason now given, after I complained about this to an admin. Any edit I make to articles this user is watching are getting reverted, even when they have nothing to do with this issue also. But it keeps being cited as the reason the article is reverted. I just want to know if this is actually a real thing someone here came up with, or if anyone else has seen this same issue with the same editor? I don't understand why they are it looks like, reverting all my edits now to any article they are watching, but they keep saying this is why. Even when I am making edits not related to this at all. I just am wondering if this is actually some kind of real thing someone here proposed, or if this is just made up excuses to revert everything done to any articles they are watching.Bluesangrel (talk) 23:01, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Gary Harris Info Update
Added information about Gary Harris' first season as a starter with the Denver Nuggets. No such information had been provided. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsande22 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Utah Jazz Valuation
I added the current Forbes valuation of the Utah Jazz to the team history as I found it to be a valuable piece of info when considering their place in the NBA as a small market team. --Editforschool13 (talk) 17:04, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Navboxes and WP:BIDIRECTIONAL
For those interested in navboxes, there is an RfC about the use of WP:BIDIRECTIONAL that you may want to participate in at Wikipedia_talk:Categories,_lists,_and_navigation_templates.—Bagumba (talk) 07:06, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

NBA Division Standings
Hi. the GB on the Division standing has a Error with it and is there anyway it can be fixed in time for tonight Opening Night This is what is looks like Tydude (talk) 18:54, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Here's an example link: Template:2015–16_NBA_Northwest_standings. As far as I can tell, these are put together the same way as last year's templates, so I'm not sure what the problem is. In addition, all the division standing templates have the same error message, not just the ones you created. Maybe you could try asking at Village pump (technical). Zagal e jo^^^ 03:50, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

This is a template that was created to easily update every article with the 2015–16 NBA Northwest Division standings. To use the update on any article, insert:

To highlight the Oklahoma City Thunder, insert:

For the other teams, use:
 * Denver Nuggets – DEN
 * Minnesota Timberwolves – MIN
 * Portland Blazers – POR
 * Utah Jazz – UTA

Category:2015–16 NBA season templates Category:National Basketball Association Northwest standings templates


 * There's more of an extensive problem, actually. It more involves divisional leaders and their conferences. Specifically, when it comes to the divisional leaders in a conference (such as, currently speaking, the Oklahoma City Thunder), the star signifying they were the leader in their division doesn't show up for them at all. I know this was due to the requirements of the past allowing the Top 4 teams to be the divisional leaders and a wildcard team, but that got edited this year to showcase the leader could even be as low as seed 8 in the playoffs if necessary. That's why I request that for both the Eastern and Western Conference templates, there involves an additional barrier signifying that a division leader can now fit into the Top 8 of their conference instead of just the Top 4. I don't exactly know where the barriers to that are, but I would hope this change can be implemented ASAP for future reference for not just this season, but beyond that as well. Thank you for your consideration. – AGreatPhoenixSunsFan (talk) 23:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The template was only looking to put a "*" for seeds 1–4. I changed it to allow 1–8.  However, as I understand the new playoff system, a division winner is not guaranteed a playoff spot anymore, so conceivably (but unlikely) could end up 9th or worse and be out of the playoffs.  I can change the coding to allow for div winners worse than 8th to be flagged if people want, or just cross the bridge if we ever get there. —Bagumba (talk) 01:33, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: Striking comment about division winners per explanation below.—Bagumba (talk) 02:55, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I was aware of that possibility, don't worry about that. However, I'd say we should until that kind of opportunity would present itself since, as possible as that may be, it shouldn't be considered an option until we are fully aware that, yes, there is indeed not going to be a division winner in the playoffs for either this year or some other, predetermined future year. As nice as it might be to have the NBA develop a system where it's just the best 16 teams guaranteed no matter what, there likely was still a reason why the league decided to only modify the playoffs like that and nothing more. So until we get to that point in time, I'd say 1-8 would be the perfect thing to do there. Thanks for the help there, by the way, Bagumba! – AGreatPhoenixSunsFan (talk) 05:34, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Owners looking out for their best interest. Many East owners I'm sure didn't go for it, though this year the East is outperform the West so far.—Bagumba (talk) 01:14, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Point of order: division winners are still guaranteed playoff spots. They're just no longer guaranteed that they'll be seeded 1 through 3, a division winner can be seeded as low as 8, based on regular season record. But there's no way a division winner doesn't make the playoffs. oknazevad (talk) 02:01, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I was looking for verbiage to that effect, but I never found it explicitly. Do you have a link?  thanks.—Bagumba (talk) 02:42, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Upon rereading, I think you are right. Nothing is explicitly written about qualification changes for the playoff, so assume it's still division winners and then the next top 5 teams per conference.  Only the seeding was explicitly called out.  Thanks for the clarification.  It's strange how things sometimes read differently once someone explains it :-) —Bagumba (talk) 02:50, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

3rd party needed at Jahlil Okafor
Can some of the regs help me to monitor the fluctuation in level of detail at Jahlil Okafor. I find it difficult to be impartial due to my connection to him when he was here in Chicago. I question my own decisions on distinguishing between encyclopedic detail and minutia in need of summary. Please ensure that we are presenting the content at the proper level of detail given all the recent news about his early career experiences. There have been a host of driveby content additions that I have tried to prune back to that which is encyclopedic, but I feel my own emotions may be getting in the way.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:35, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Baltimore Claws players
Category:Baltimore Claws players, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rikster2 (talk) 16:55, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

List of nicknames used in basketball
List of nicknames used in basketball is a messy article. All edits made to the article are random IPs and red link editors adding unsourced randomness. A few more page watchers would be lovely. Of course the content itself needs cleaning but just monitoring what gets added is a good thing. I have been watching the page for a while but I've had enough. I intend to do some cleaning at the article sometime but what the article needs is more page watchers. Just a suggestion. —DangerousJXD (talk) 04:23, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Franchise leaders
I want clarification regarding the Franchise leaders section in every team's article (the same applies to List of Team X accomplishments and records). If I remember correctly, this section used to be updated only after the season was over. However, there are some editors, who update it during the season. So what's the real situation regarding this matter? – Sabbatino (talk) 10:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * End-of-season-only rules are problematic as new editors wouldn't know the rule beforehand, and you risk getting into an edit war if there aren't others supporting your position. Information becoming WP:DATED is the main concern, but that can be address if the editor prefaces it with "as of ..." If the WP:ASOF is met, I'd be inclined to leave it, assuming it is verifiable.  Otherwise, use your discretion to discuss DATED and ASOF with the editor, or optionally the revert dated and/or unverifiable updates.—Bagumba (talk) 07:35, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I managed to persuade people about not adding head coaching stats during the season. However, when it comes to teams and list of players, I'm the only one watching franchise leaders sections not to be updated during season and all new users just do as they wish and noone is backing me up... – Sabbatino (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The reality is we are all volunteers here, and people choose how much time and on what they want to edit. I sympathize, as we all must wonder at some point why people don't care to patrol the areas that are "important". There's Category:National Basketball Association statistical leaders, which I am sure gets updated frequently in-season, if not daily.  What would you propose be done?—Bagumba (talk) 21:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sports stats are a problem throughout Wikipedia. Newbies and casual users just don't realize what it takes to maintain all of this data, and educating all of those users gets exhausting. But outside of semi-protecting everything, I don't know what we can do. (Heck, even with semi-protection, people will come out of the woodwork to update things incorrectly.) I wish we would stop trying to duplicate basketball-reference.com, but if the people want half-finished stats, then that's what they'll get. Zagal e jo^^^ 01:41, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Lead sentence with "who currently plays for ..."
I notice "who currently plays for ..." in a lot of NBA bios, moreso than bios in other sports. For example, Kobe Bryant recently had "who currently plays" removed and then added from its lead of "Kobe Bean Bryant (born August 23, 1978) is an American professional basketball player who currently plays for the Los Angeles Lakers of the National Basketball Association (NBA)." I usually don't add it, neither do I remove it, knowing that it's prevalent in this project. In User:Tony1/How to improve your writing, which is linked as "advice" from Featured article criteria, it discourages use of currently as it is already implied by the verb tense: "'Mumbai is  currently  India's leading financial centre'. Here, the present tense of 'is' says it all." There is never an all-out edit war on this, but I have noticed a slow churn over time back and forth. I'd say currently is not needed, but it'd be good to get agreement one way or another as a project.—Bagumba (talk) 00:48, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that leads are better off without "currently" in the mix but it isn't something that's worth fussing over. I'm all for gaining a consensus to one specific preferred method but is it really worth it? Going around removing "currently" from every article in sight is a waste of time, even if it's better off without it. Gaining a consensus is worth it though so yeah, I say it's best to have "currently" excluded from articles' leads. —DangerousJXD (talk) 01:00, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * "is it really worth it?": I would have left it alone if it was an unwritten rule that is just followed. But like I said, I do see it being removed from time to time, so thought it's better to figure out what is the motivation to add it, and point editors to it if we decide to leave it.  There is no requirement that anyone has to go and remove it, but we can get agreement whether it should continue to be (re-)added.—Bagumba (talk) 01:23, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I 100% agree with that. That's exactly what I was trying to convey. —DangerousJXD (talk) 01:39, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't mind either option. I personally like "currently" and have used it in leads all throughout my time here, but I certainly do not push the use of it and/or go round re-inserting it. But does "player who plays" sound normal to you guys? Obviously a player "plays", so I find "currently" a good filler word. The alternative is "American professional basketball player for the", but I personally don't like this option. DaHuzyBru (talk) 07:58, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Any specific reason against "player for the ...", or just personal preference? It seems like "American professional basketball player for the" is consistent with most other sports bios.  Some projects are mixed, with something like "American professional basketball shooting guard who plays for the" in some articles, but I'm not a big fan of that per WP:SEAOFBLUE, and a non-basketball fan wouldn't know one position from another, so I'd prefer it not be in the first sentence.  Other options?—Bagumba (talk) 09:04, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * One problem with that is that it is improper sentence form for teams outside of the USA in most cases. In USA teams are referred to with the word "the" in front of the team's name. Outside the USA, this is almost never the case. But you see many articles here putting "the" in front of team names that are outside the USA. Even though they are never referred to in that way.Bluesangrel (talk) 22:13, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Just personal preference, but I know User:Namiba prefers "American professional [position] with the". I'm not sure if that is a popular method though; I think others have contested that style in the past. DaHuzyBru (talk) 10:58, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think that is a de facto practice in NBA articles. I'd wager that most NBA bios, and maybe all GA/FAs, don't state the player's position right after "basketball" e.g. "basketball point guard".—Bagumba (talk) 00:18, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I was basing this on NFL player articles, which go by the standard of "(Player name) is an American football (position) for the (team name) of the National Football League (NFL). If NBA player articles have used "currently" for a while now, then I guess I can't argue with removing it any further. ~  Dissident93  (talk) 04:14, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think there's a rough consensus that it is ok without "currently". It's your decision if you don't want to rock the boat.  For me personally, I might remove it if I am editing an article for another reason. Of course, someone not knowing this discussion might add it back to be consistent. :-(—Bagumba (talk) 05:01, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * If that's really the case, then we'd should aim for consistency with every player's article and edit them, but that's more trouble than it's really worth, like DangerousJXD said. ~ Dissident93  (talk) 06:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, it's only an issue with active players, so that's like 400 or so bios?  Maybe I'll have to crank open AWB or wait for a wikignome. Or let it be.—Bagumba (talk) 06:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Way to fill up my watchlist, Bagumba :-) DaHuzyBru (talk) 08:36, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Was going to apologize for that, but you beat me to it. So I had my momentary "why the #$%$ would so-and-so waste their time on that" moment on Wikipedia, but the "player who currently plays for" is now more or less just a simple "player for" now.  I'm sure there's a few stray ones that didnt match the pattern that weren't changed.  I ran across a few "player who plays for".  Coaches have a weird format, so I didnt touch them for now.—Bagumba (talk) 09:28, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * It's improper English. As it should say "whom" and not "who". But I tried to change that a couple times and people immediately revert it.Bluesangrel (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No, "who" is correct. "Who" is the subject of the clause. Think of it this way: You would write, "He currently plays for the Lakers," not "Him currently plays for the Lakers." Zagal e jo^^^ 00:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

While I'm not a huge fan of mandatory formulaic lead sections, the simplest opening sentence for an active NBA player is usually something like this:


 * "James Patrick Smith is an American basketball player who is a power forward for the Chicago Bulls of the National Basketball Association (NBA).

While I would not mandate a formula for every NBA player lead, nor absolutely ban the use of the words "current" or "currently," those words are typically unnecessary. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:57, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure why this thread was revived when "currently" was personally eradicated by me, unless editors are creeping it back in.—Bagumba (talk) 04:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Notability of stats lists
@,, , , , , , , , , , : There was some sentiment at Articles for deletion/NBA league average height, weight, age and playing experience, which was closed as "delete", that various sports needed to clean up their stats lists. While the topic is fresh, is anyone aware of areas that we can clean up here at WP:NBA? Pinging all the participants at the AfD (some may or may not already be in this project)—Bagumba (talk) 01:48, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * At a minimum, I expect that all standalone stats lists need to meet WP:LISTN—Bagumba (talk) 01:48, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Here's the list if anyone needs a starting point: Category:List-Class NBA articles. -- Tavix ( talk ) 01:53, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * There is Category:National Basketball Association statistical leaders, but there might be stats lists lurking that aren't in this cat.—Bagumba (talk) 02:22, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping. As I looked over the list of List-Class articles, the only one that jumped out at me was 2000-01 National Basketball Association Eastern Conference playoff leaders.  As best I could tell, there are no list articles for any other conference/season, which begs the question of what's so special about this particular combination of conference and season.
 * I also noted that there are a few List-Class articles on particular seasons for the Rochester Royals and the Cincinnati Royals. But here, the question is why these are classified as List-Class.
 * Third, I note that there are quite a few "nationality" lists. I've not formed any opinion as to whether listing NBA players by nationality is encyclopedic, but I note that most (but not all) other sports leagues don't have "by nationality" articles.
 * Finally, an observation that goes beyond your question -- there seems to be no consistency as to whether an article of the type "List of [College Team] in the NBA Draft" has been included in the NBA project. Some have; some haven't.
 * I hope this was helpful. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)