Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiProjects and collaborations

The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention: You can sign up to receive a user talk page invitation to participate in discussions of interest to you, see Wikipedia:Feedback request service

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Concerts

Based on the discussion above as there has not been much activity, should we have the festivals be placed into explanatory footnotes ("Explanatory footnotes"), or placed into the venue column on the tour date table ("In-Table")? HorrorLover555 (talk) 21:17, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association

1) Should the articles of any NBA players say that they are often considered one of the greatest players of all time?

Example: [Hakeem] Olajuwon is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time.

2) If the answer to the previous question is yes, what standard should be used? Note: this question is optional

2a) Every NBA 75 player is listed as one of the greatest.

2b) The following list of basketball players:

2c) The statement is only included if sources discussing the player's legacy commonly state that that player is one of the greatest in the history of basketball, or use equivalent superlative language.

Example of sourcing for the claim of Bill Russell being one of the greatest of all time: NBA legend, the greatest winner in basketball history, is widely considered one of the greatest basketball players of all time, basketball great, NBA great, one of the greatest players of all-time, the ultimate winner.

2d) Any other criteria; if this option is selected, please do not simply give a different list of basketball players, but rather a different standard from which the inclusion or exclusion of a given player can be assessed through application of some common criteria.

Context: Various historical NBA players have been called "one of the greatest", "the greatest of all-time", or "the greatest at a position" by the press, magazines, books, former players, experts, etc. These terms are very subjective in nature and cover a 75+ year history, but can be sourced none-the-less. Discussions have ranged from the terms being vital to non-encyclopedic, from leaving the term in a player legacy section to prominently being displayed in the lead to not using the term at all. Please help us out with a yes or no on the term "greatest" in the lead section and the reasoning behind it. Thanks.

Pinging previous discussion contributors: @Fyunck(click), Left guide, Wamalotpark, Bagumba, Johnnynumerofive, Somarain, Zagalejo, Eg224, Jessintime, Orlando Davis, Assadzadeh, GOAT Bones231012, Anonymous7432, and Boles P94:

Ladtrack (talk) 17:08, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

v t e Requests for comment (All)
Articles (All)	Biographies (bio) Economy, trade, and companies (econ) History and geography (hist) Language and linguistics (lang) Maths, science, and technology (sci) Media, the arts, and architecture (media) Politics, government, and law (pol) Religion and philosophy (reli) Society, sports, and culture (soc)
Non-articles (All)	Wikipedia style and naming (style) Wikipedia policies and guidelines (policy) WikiProjects and collaborations (proj) Wikipedia technical issues and templates (tech) Wikipedia proposals (prop) Unsorted
Instructions	To add a discussion to this list: Add the tag `{{rfc\|xxx}}` at the top of a talk page section, where "xxx" is the category abbreviation. The different category abbreviations that should be used with {{rfc}} are listed above in parenthesis. Multiple categories are separated by a vertical pipe. For example, `{{rfc\|xxx\|yyy}}`, where "xxx" is the first category and "yyy" is the second category.
For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Report problems to Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot.