Talk:Serbia men's national basketball team

All medal list

Serbia is successor of ex Yugoslavia, so you have to put whole list of medal;s, not just since 1990s!

FR Yugoslavia is not a successor state of SFR Yugoslavia. Period. What we should discuss is whether Serbia is a successor of FR Yugoslavia medals as FIBA count only results after 2007 for our team.--AirWolf ^talk 12:26, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

This is all true! Read this Crnibombarder (talk) http://sport.blic.rs/ostali-sportovi/hrvatski-olimpijski-odbor-sve-medalje-do-1988-pripadaju-srbiji/em8dby4 —Preceding undated comment added 11:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

No it is not true, read the FIBA homepage!--Je suis blocked by Darkwind 13:53, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

FIBA recognize that medals to Serbia too! All trophy's still exist in Serbia Basketball Federation! FIBA, just separitete that for a better looking, nothing else! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crnibombarder (talk • contribs) 17:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

No, do not lie about, what FIBA recognizes!--Anaxagoras13 (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

no no no, "The Olympic Committee of Serbia, created in 1910 and recognized in 1912, is deemed the direct successor to both Yugoslav Olympic Committee and the Olympic Committee of Serbia and Montenegro by IOC, and therefore the inheritor to all the records of the defunct nations.[2] In the period from 1920 to 2006, athletes representing these defunct countries won a total of 99 medals: 95 at Summer Games and 4 at Winter Games." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia_at_the_Olympics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C600:1150:7D69:A3E0:EDDC:F641 (talk) 20:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

1994

World Championship was given to Belgrade to organize as we were actual WC as well, but due to sanctions Serbia was kicked out. So it was not "did not qualify" but banned coz of political reason, political sanctions77.105.23.199 (talk) 13:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Good information. Thanks!--AirWolf ^talk 12:24, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

dispute

The YUGOSLAVIAN successes have to be removed this AREN'T succeses of the Serbian national team, even like it aren't succeses of the croatian or montenegrin national teams! This is only the succes of the Yugoslavia national basketball team Yoda1893 23:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Why do you think so? Serbia and Montenegro was successor to Yugoslavia team, and Serbia is successor to Serbia and Montenegro.Laughing Man 03:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Serbia is successor state and has the heritage of the medals. Also, Serbs made up the largest % of those ex teams. By FIBA Serbia is the one who takes those medals as own! No dispute77.105.23.199 (talk) 13:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

REVERT It is only the SUCCESOR but it ISN'T the same team. Even like Yugoslavia isn't the same like Serbia this wasn't only succeses of the Serbian. Or do you think that the socialistic dictatorship for example belongs only to the Serbian history??? West Germany was the succesor of Nazi Germany but it was even in all points ANOTHER country! Yoda1893 14:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Obviously not the same team, but for records and statistics, it the successor. According to FIBA, affiliation is 1936 [1] and Serbia is successor of Serbia and Montenegro team [2]

The records are only the records of the old team! Yoda1893 14:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you please provide a single source that states that Serbia is not the successor to the previous team? At this point, I don't know how you can dispute that FIBA is a reliable source. Please stop removing this information as at this point it is pure vandalism as you have nothing to backup what you are assuming. Laughing Man 16:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't need a source because the FIBA didn't declare the SERBIAN national basketball team to the world Champion of 2002 or any other year, the history of the TEAM began 2006!!! Your "serbisation" of the Yugoslavian history isn't acceptable!!! Yoda1893 17:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

This really has nothing to do with Yugoslavian history, this has to do with how FIBA is handling the basketball federations/history/statistics. If you see the link of FIBA.com that I have given, you will see that FIBA recognizes the current Basketball Federation of Serbia as the successor the previous federations as it has been affiliated since 1936. [3] Again, please understand that Wikipedia is not a place for original research, and you must have a reliable source to backup your claims. If you feel the FIBA site is incorrect, can you please provide a reliable source that supports your claim and I will not revert your edits. Laughing Man 18:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the only evidence given that Yugoslav team records belong on this page is the text "Year of affiliation: 1936" found on FIBA World Championship 2006 site for "Serbia (SCG)".

On the other side:

1. official FIBA member history for Serbia clearly states the opposite [4];
2. other Wikipedia articles do not follow the logic "member retaining the place of the old FIBA member gets all of its credit", e.g. Russia national basketball team;
3. and anyway, stating that a nation's sport achievements are impressive because of "how FIBA is handling the basketball federations/history/statistics" does not sound very sporty to me. I can't imagine Serbian basketball players really wanting the encyclopedia article to look like it does now. But I may be wrong.

Hrvoje Šimić 12:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

wikipedia summer games medal pages says "The Olympic Committee of Serbia, created in 1910 and recognized in 1912, is deemed the direct successor to both Yugoslav Olympic Committee and the Olympic Committee of Serbia and Montenegro by IOC, and therefore the inheritor to all the records of the defunct nations.[2] In the period from 1920 to 2006, athletes representing these defunct countries won a total of 99 medals: 95 at Summer Games and 4 at Winter Games" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia_at_the_Olympics we get it, you are an angry croat who hates the serbs, but you hate does NOT change facts, so knock it off — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:646:C600:1150:7D69:A3E0:EDDC:F641 (talk) 20:32, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Interesting now that the records are incomplete on that page Hrvoje, it seems they list 2005 as European Championship history, but it's clear that the team was still Serbia and Montenegro at that time which also competed in 2003, and as Federal Republic of Yugoslavia competed 4 times and won 3 EuroBasket championships. The FR Yugoslavia also competed 2 times and won 2 world championships. What you propose we do then?

Also, the "Russia basketball team" article you show seems only to be a stub that was created this month, and I don't think it makes sense to even reference it at this point as a precident. Unfortunately, there is no real standard format/template for national basketball team articles, and most of them are not of the best quality.

OK, Russia national football team then. Hrvoje Šimić 15:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I do not want to loose the records of FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro teams and I have added them the "Yugoslavia basketball team" article but I'm not sure if that's the best place. I'll try to do some more research to get some definitive answer, but when I created this article the sources I found listed the full history under the Serbia and Montenegro team, and that news article on FIBA made it seem that Serbia basketball federation succeeded the previous Serbia and Montenegro federation so I don't want to jump to any conclusions. Laughing Man 14:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not surprised to see that FIBA site(s) are messed up about this. Their burocracy is probably fuzzy about the "formal" status of the team records in the case of Yugoslavia, and the site publishers are probably adding another layer of confusion. But I really don't see that Wikipedia should blindly copy whatever information falls out of that organisation. If they have a clear policy, we probably should cite it. But I don't see it. And anyway, even a clear FIBA policy is not enough to end this argument.

I'm more interested in an encyclopedic, common-sense style rather than technical convinience. The article in this state is confusing. "Famous players" section cites only players from Serbia (logically), but then you lose the connection with the medals. If I scanned the article quickly and didn't know better, I would made out of it that Serbia was once called Yugoslavia, it was a basketball superpower, and that Dražen Petrović, Toni Kukoč and Dino Rađa (for example) were not an important part of its achievements.

I propose this: write a short section describing the Serbia's team succession from Yugo team, link it to Yugoslavia national basketball team and move the relevant stats there. The section can contain a digest of Yugo team impact on world basketball, and the contribution Serbian players made in that team. That way it doesn't look like Serbia is a basketball newbie, and also that it is not hogging all the credit. -- Hrvoje Šimić 15:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

As much as you might not agree, FIBA is the authority in terms of international basketball the same way that FIFA is the authority in terms of international football, and I can't image another source to be more authoritative, but if you can find something, please share it with us to add the the article.

Of course I agree! If you are refering to "[we should not] blindly copy whatever information falls out of that organisation", you are misrepresenting my views. And I see you agree with me, since you chose not to copy the "(SCG)" text from the same page. You only choose to copy the information that supports your POV, and ignore or discredit (in an offhand manner) any unsupporting evidence. --Hrvoje Šimić 12:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Nothing to do with POV, I'm looking for facts here. I think the fact that now "SCG" is now attached to "Serbia", it further appears that that the current basketball federation has succeeded the previous Serbia and Montenegro federation. Until there is a solid reference that states otherwise, I think changing the article from what we have is simply wrong. Laughing Man 16:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I think if you are getting that "basketball superpower" impression it is understandable, even from the history of FRY/SCG teams alone, although one can also see that recently the team has not been as successful. I don't know if you noticed, but I clarified the records to point out which teams were SFRY/FRY/SCG. I also wanted to point out that the article lists players from Bosnia-Herzegovina (Danlilovic) and Croatia (Stojakovic) as well, but perhaps the 'Era' that players played in should be clarified there.Laughing Man 15:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Your source DON'T improve that the RECORDS belong also to the Serbian Team! Yoda1893 23:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

If you feel that the records don't belong to the team, at the very least you are still out of line as the FIBA affiliation date (1936) is clear from the FIBA web page as well as if you feel that SFR Yugoslavia records do not belong to Serbia national team (disregarding you have provided absolutely nothing to backup what you are saying in the first place), what about FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro records? By adding "1" appearance in the FIBA World Championship, what about the previous 2 appearances as Federal Republic of Yugoslavia? Now you are arguing that there is no continuity between FR Yugoslavia and SCG. Your edits contradict themselves.

Until you can find a single source of the contrary, you are simply trolling as far as I'm concerned. I think you have no idea of the history of Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and Serbia and Montenegro, as well as separating that with way the FIBA manages national teams through federations / associations. Finally, can you please explain what you mean in your edit summary? "rv stop serbisation" [5] // Laughing Man 00:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

With stop "serbisation" I mean, that you should stop stealing the records of the Yugoslavian team. Because you "serbisate" (means: representing Yugoslav records as Serbian records) history which is in the same way part of the Croatian, Bosnian, Montenegrin. etc. history, but even like in this article NOT part of the new team! Even Russia national basketball team CAN'T list records of the soviet union team! Your useless source only describes that the FEDERATION took over the affliation date of the former Federation but NOT that the TEAM took over the records of the old teams. Surely there is a continunity between Yugoslavia and Serbia, but not more like for example between Yugoslavia and Croatia. Yoda1893 11:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well there is no "continuity" between Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Croatia, and Bosnia, only between Serbia and Montenegro. So where should FR Yugoslavia stats go? Again it seems to me you don't understand both the history and the way that FIBA works, this is an exercise in futility. Laughing Man 16:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring

I have added User:Yoda1893's contention for disputed factual accuracy, as well {{fact}} tag on (top). I hope this enough to please stop the silly revert wars until we can got some solid confirmation of team succession details from FIBA or Basketball Federation of Serbia. Laughing Man 18:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I support adding the dispute tag, and removing the sentence from intro. However, I do not agree that the dispute is about "if SER succeeds SCG/YUG teams". It is about listing Yugoslavia's national basketball team records as Serbia's. Succession is only a part of that dispute. I have also removed the misleading section heading from the Talk page. Please do not modify other people's entries or put them in different context.

Please show me other peoples entries that have I modified. I have never done this, so do not make false accusations. All I have done is added section titles and indentation. Hrvoje, I recommend reviewing Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Layout as well as Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#New topics and headings on talk pages. Thanks // Laughing Man 20:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I was not accusing you of anything, just warning you. I felt that placing old comments under that title changed their context. I am aware that you may have only tried to organise the talk page better, but you have to be sensitive about it. A neutral title like "The original discussion" would not be objectionable. -- Hrvoje Šimić 21:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Also to be clear, feel free to modify the disputed reason as I am not the one disputing the article, I added the tag to hopefully put an end to the disruptive edit warring. // Laughing Man 21:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I also feel that ignoring the evidence presented by the other side and qualifying it as "nothing but original research and opinions" is very damaging for the dispute resolution. I urge all sides to direct their efforts on encyclopedic quality of the article and not on short-term political goals. -- Hrvoje Šimić 19:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Please point out a single source provided by Yoda1893 as perhaps I have missed it. What stands out to me is the "I don't need a source" statement he made. [6] Thanks. // Laughing Man 20:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I said "evidence presented by the other side", which includes both Yoda1893 and me. Are you saying you will ignore evidence only if it comes from me? :) -- Hrvoje Šimić 21:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

You quoting my "nothing but original research" comment was taken from my edit summary in the article. You have not been edit warring and the comment so I do not know why you think this was directed by you. I will of course not ignore any sources (not sure what you mean by evidence) that clearly define the book keeping of these statistics as I would like to see how the ruling body of international basketball decides. // Laughing Man 00:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Your comment was on the edits: you stated that the information (records) for the SFRY should not be removed from the article without supporting sources. Therefore, you ignored the fact that there were supporting sources listed on the Talk page (and they were no worse than the sources used to support the claim). That it was one user adding the sources and another one acting according to them is irrelevant. -- Hrvoje Šimić 06:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

YOU need a source which improves that the Serbian team has the same records like the Yugoslav and you won't find a source for this. Yoda1893 21:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Overview of evidence for dispute about incorporating SFRY team records

I have tried to systematically gather relevant claims and evidence in this dispute (as well as adding some found during the writing of this section) in hope that this way all the evidence presented will be taken into consideration and not ignored. I am aware that this list may not be complete or accurate, so please feel free to join in. I'm experimenting here, so I don't know is it better to edit this list or create other(s). All I know is I would like the list(s) to stay as clean and manageable as possible.

For purposes of the debate I have reduced the scope to the most controversial part regarding the SFRY team records. The question is:

Should a Wikipedia article on Serbia's national basketball team incorporate pre-breakup SFRY's national basketball team records?

Evidence for incorporating SFRY team records in this article:

1. Claim: For FIBA records and statistics, Serbia is (indirectly) the only sucessor of SFRY. A successor's records should incorporate the records of succeeded teams.
   1. Source: Pages stating "Year of affiliation: 1936" for Serbia on FIBA World Championship 2006 site [7]
   2. Source: A FIBA news item stating "The Basketball Federation of Serbia will retain the place of the former Basketball Federation of Serbia and Montenegro as a FIBA member." [8]
   3. Source: Listings of "Participation" and "Achievements in FIBA competition" for Serbia (or Serbia&Montenegro) on FIBA World Championship 2006 site stating "SERBIA & MONTENEGRO (SCG) 13th appearance (3 consecutive)". [9]
   4. (moved to #2.1)
2. Claim: International news organizations represent Serbia as successor to the previous Yugoslavia federations
   1. Source: Listing of international competition history of Serbia National Team on EuroBasket.com references complete statistics, starting at 1950 through 2006: [10]
   2. Source: InsideHoops.com combines records for SFR Yugoslavia 3 and 2 FR Yugoslavia championships (Total 5) [11]
   3. Source: InsideHoops.com article: "It was Yugoslavia (now known as Serbia & Montenegro) who defeated the USA Senior squad and eliminated it from medal contention at the 2002 FIBA World Championship..." [12]
   4. Source: CBC article: victory over defending champion Serbia and Montenegro.....which won the gold medal in 2002 as Yugoslavia, but only one player from that team was back to defend the title. [13]
   5. Source: Inq7 article: "The third world championship in 1959 was won by Brazil; the fourth in 1963, also won by Brazil; the fifth in 1967 by the Soviet Union; the sixth in 1970 by Yugoslavia; the seventh in 1974 by the Soviet Union; the eighth in 1978 by Yugoslavia; the ninth in 1982 by the Soviet Union; the 10th in 1986 by the US; the 11th in 1990 by Yugoslavia; the 12th in 1994 by the US; the 13th in 1998 by Yugoslavia; the 14th in 2002 by Serbia and Montenegro (formerly Yugoslavia); and the 15th in 2006 by Spain." [14]
   6. Source: ABC sport (.au) "In late matches, Spain ousted defending champion Serbia and Montenegro" [15]
   7. Source: Radio New Zealand "Spain beat defending champions Serbia and Montenegro" [16]

Evidence against incorporating SFRY team records in this article:

1. Claim: FIBA official records and statistics for Serbia do not include SFRY team records.
   1. (removed)
   2. Evidence: Official FIBA Europe site page about Serbia team history [17]
2. Claim: Other Wikipedia articles in similar situation do not incorporate records of pre-breakup teams.
   1. Evidence: Wikipedia article on Russia national basketball team.
   2. Evidence: Wikipedia article on Russia national football team.
   3. Evidence: Wikipedia article on Serbia national football team.
3. Claim: Incorporating SFRY team records is misleading and unencyclopedic.
   1. Evidence: Infobox lists "Serbia" as "1970, 1978, 1990" World Champion, etc. [18]
   2. Evidence: Article is listing SFRY team achievements but is excluding many players who made them possible, apparently because they never played for Serbia (e.g. Dražen Petrović, Toni Kukoč). [19]

Comments about listed statements:

• I propose to add comments about the contents of the preceding lists here, to avoid clogging it. Hrvoje Šimić 21:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Regarding the first point for "against", Listings for Team USA only goes back to 2003 as well. Those statistics are not complete. But in fact, do support the fact that Serbia and Montenegro inherited Yugoslavia's records, so I added this as link to the top of the page you linked -- "SERBIA & MONTENEGRO (SCG) 13th appearance (3 consecutive)". Thanks for finding this link Hrvoje. USA National team profile on the same site, with incomplete championship history. In regard the FIBAEurope link, I believe it's the same story as FIBA link, and the fact that it shows any history is a sign that this new federation will be inheriting previous federations stats, as it's obvious Serbia did not compete before 2006. This is a good start Hrvoje, I will look for something more definitive, and try to get an answer directly from the appropriate organizations if possible as at this point. // Laughing Man 01:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• Regarding the second point, I do not know the how Russia teams were handled by FIFA and UEFA, I need to investigate, but if you do notice the Serbia national football team article does incorporate the records of Serbia and Montenegro/FR Yugoslavia. I don't think to much weight should be taken in this case though, as FIFA and FIBA do need to follow the same criteria for record keeping, Also the situation with SFRY->FRY->SCG->SER seems to be a unique case, so we need to find out how it's being handled. // Laughing Man 01:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• Regarding the third point, everything that is misleading can be clarified. The goal here I think is to get the facts correct first then we can clarify them. // Laughing Man 01:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I think it will lead us to a situation like this: First, we get the "facts" straight (e.g. "Serbia is 1970 World Champion in basketball") and we write it explicitly in the article. If someone says to herself "I thought it was another country" she will be able to scan the article and find out that, actually, the team was called "Yugoslavia" back then. If she thoughts "But wasn't Yugoslavia a whole lotta more than just Serbia?" and reads the article through, it will read something like "well, yes it was, but for the purposes of records and statistics, let's say it wasn't". And for the not-so-inquisitive, they will take home just the "facts". Hrvoje Šimić 06:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, please provide some sources as I have been doing that support your theory, as Wikipedia is not a place for original research. Please point where else 'she' will be confused as this hypothetical nonsense is really not getting us anywhere and I have already tried to improve the article by clarifying where records are from. At first I was assuming good faith when you decided to start this 'case' but now I'm not sure what your intentions are. Please also understand that the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.// Laughing Man 14:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

You have ignored or dismissed every source I have provided and flooded discussion with sources irrelevant to the dispute (stating S&M team is the new name for FRY team, which nobody disputes). On my attempt to discuss the implications of presenting SFRY team as the same national team as Serbia's you throw around inappropriate Wikipedia policies like some troll robot. If your goal is to make everybody else give up cooperating with you, keep it up - you're doing a good job. -- Hrvoje Šimić 17:38, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

All I've seen is one source above, the FIBA Europe link that does not display the full history of the team. [20] you have not produced a single source that states Serbia is a brand new team and does not succeed the previous federations. The strongest primary source that we have so far is the FIBA press release that establishes continuity between Serbia and Serbia and Montenegro [21] The recent news sources I have provided are not irrelevant as it clearly establishes the continuity between Serbia and Montenegro and Yugoslavia, which is what Yoda1893 has contested from the beginning [22] so at a minimum, it should stop his disruption of the article. I don't think NOR and WP:V are irrelvant and in fact if those were respected (providing verifiable sources instead of original research), there would be no dispute in the first place. I have spent lots of time researching this on English language publications and have had a very hard time finding something more clear, and the best that I have found (FIBA sources) I have shared with everyone, and would appreciate if others did the same with their findings as it will help resolve the dispute. // Laughing Man 18:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• MOVED HERE FROM THE LIST ABOVE (evidence not able to support claim FIBA official records and statistics for Serbia do not include SFRY team records.) -- Hrvoje Šimić 06:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

 1.1. Evidence against: Listings of "Participation" and "Achievements in FIBA competition"
 for Serbia (or Serbia&Montenegro) on FIBA World Championship 2006 site [23]  
   Invalid -- please see comments below, this in fact supports the 'for' side. 
   by Laughing Man 01:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Since you are only referring to Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, not Federal Republic of Yugoslavia here, I have clarified disputed tag in article, perhaps it will help other editors understand the dispute who are not familiar with the history of the region. // Laughing Man 21:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• I could not verify that evidence "for" #1.4 from EuroBasket.com lists FIBA official records, or that it supports the claim it was supposed to. Please state the evidence more clearly or remove it. Hrvoje Šimić 06:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not removing any sources. Eurobasket.com is an international basketball news organization. // Laughing Man 06:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• So does anyone have any sources that support the theory that Serbia is not the successor of previous basketball federations? I don't know how the factual accuracy can be disputed if there is not one source that supports your original research that Serbia is not the successor the previous basketball federations. // Laughing Man 20:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Here's my take on the matter:

• SFR Yugoslavia is a separate team.
• FR Yugoslavia, SCG and Serbia are the same.
• Montenegro is separate.

Nevertheless, if the dispute is finished, update the Eurobasket, FIBA Worlds, Olympics pages. --Howard the Duck 14:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

SERBIA/FR YUGOSLAVIA AND THE SFR YUGOSLAVIA AREN'T THE SAME THING!!!!

They are!! From [24]

COUNTRY 	                                GOLD  	 SILVER  	 BRONZE  	 TOTAL  	
USA  	                                        3   	 3   	 5   	 10  
Soviet Union  	                                3   	 3   	 2   	 8  
Yugoslavia  	                            3   	 3   	 2   	 8  
Brazil  	                                2   	 2   	 2   	 6  
Russia  	                                0   	 2   	 0   	 2  
Argentina  	                                1   	 1   	 0   	 2  
Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)  	    2   	 0   	 0   	 2  
Chile  	                                0   	 0   	 2   	 2  
Spain  	                                1   	 0   	 0   	 1  
Greece  	                                0   	 1   	 0   	 1  
Croatia  	                                0   	 0   	 1   	 1  
Philippines  	                                0   	 0   	 1   	 1  
Germany  	                                0   	 0   	 1   	 1  

So, i'll cancel all references to SFRY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.222.94.12 (talk) 10:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

What about this update? See: [25].--AirWolf ^talk 12:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:KCC Logo.png

The image Image:KCC Logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Serbia did not separate from Yugoslavia, other republics did!

This is the reason why Serbia can be ONLY successor of Yugoslavian sport trophy's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.73.44.108 (talk) 04:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It should be, but unfortunately not. FIBA is the only international sports organization who does not recognize Serbia as the direct successor of SFR Yugoslavia, probably because they want USA to be considered the most successful nation, but we must to write the truth. Aca Srbin (talk) 22:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC+01)

<sarcasm>I should have known that it's about the Great World Conspiracy against Serbs</sarcasm>. Let's employ some elementary logic: why would Serbia, who by agreement inherits only 36% (somewhat over a third) of the SFRY succession, get all the credits for its sports successes? The pre-1991 medals were won by the big Yugoslavia, we assign them to the big Yugoslavia, plain and simple. Post-breakup medals are attributed to individual countries, which is only fair. We make some exception for S&M->Serbia inheritance, because Serbia is 10 times bigger than Montenegro (though I wouldn't mind having that split, too, although it involves practical issues). It it were otherwise, should Serbia also claim, for example, Winter olympic medals won by Jure Franko and Bojan Križaj? Where would you draw the border? The border drawn is pretty simple and obvious: SFRY break up in 1991/92, and everything before that goes to SFRY. No such user (talk) 07:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Serbia inherited S&M achievements not because it is 10 times bigger than Montenegro and not because players from Serbia always constituted 60-100% majority and not because they were key players. Serbia is successor of SCG according to Constitutional charter (if one member seek independence, the other will retain memberships, obligations and rights of joint state. -- Bojan  Talk  08:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It is logical that the FR Yugoslavia is a direct successor of SFR Yugoslavia, S&M direct successor of the FRY and Serbia direct successor of S&M. FIBA is the only international sports organization that has not served this logic. All other respect it, because it is so most fair and most realistic. We liked it or not, we must to write as it is. That is, unfortunately, that Serbia is not a direct successor of the SFRY.Aca Srbin (talk) 20:08, 23 September 2010 (UTC+01)

Why is it logical that "FR Yugoslavia is a direct successor of SFR Yugoslavia"? Even the FR Yugoslavia itself stopped claiming that some time around 2000, and re-applied for UN membership (according to Badinter commission findings). On the contrary, it is logical that all 6 states are shared successors, but no one should have the right to claim the pre-1991 sports events only for itself. No such user (talk) 06:35, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I think both sides here are entering into WP:OR and personal beleavs. @NSU, many world sports organisations did recognised Serbia as the only successor of Yugoslavia (KoY and SFRY), including the Olympic Cometee. The organisations, as you sarcastically said, are not any conspiracists (although politics do often interfere in sports but that´s a long story for sure) and they did decided to have Serbia as only inheritor for a reason. Now, regarding basketball, that is not the case, old big Yugoslavia records are no inhrited by Serbia, only the results since 1992. FkpCascais (talk) 00:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

What makes Serbia have rights to those medals?

Medals won by Yugoslav national basketball team were won by Yugoslav team, not Serbian! Yugoslav team was composed of less than half of Croats so that makes it possible to Serbia have any rights on those medals, those medals should not be forgotten! Dražen Petrović, Aleksandar Petrović, Toni Kukoč, Dino Rađa, best players of Yugoslav basketball ever and they were Serbs! END OF STORY!- Most of the players were Serbs in all sports, Serbia is the most succesful sport nation that emerged from ex Yu so Serbia is the successor of those medals by right .END OF STORY

Though, i wouldn't say anything if teams were composed of 100% Serbs but in most cases it was composed of 50/50%, sometimes more than 50% Croats, not just in basketball, i'm talking about waterpolo, football, handball, volleyball as well... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.60.96.81 (talk) 23:53, 27 January 2013 (UTC) This is not true and just ignorrant + you stated Serbs Petrovic in the listing, in all sports the best players were Serbs like Kicanovic ,Slavnic ,Korac ,Divac etc. in basketball

The Yugoslavian debts were split on 6 republics, by the way.

A few short facts about Yugoslavia and Serbia... Yugoslavia was made by Serbia and Montenegro as a part of winning side of WWI and territorial extensions that they got in that war. Serbian sovereign (King Alexander) name it as Yugoslavia and before that name it as an country of Serbs, Croats and Slovenians. In WWII, Yugoslavia was occupied by Germany, divided and pushed into civil war during that time. After the war and agreement between winning sides of WWII Yugoslavia became a communist state. Break up of Yugoslavia was not a single event of dissolution of one country, it was process in witch Slovenia (declared independence in 1991), Croatia (1991), FYR Macedonia (1991), Bosnia and Herzegovina(1992-1995) and finally Montenegro(2006) declared independence from remaining country. Whole process has started 1991 and ended by 2006. On the end Serbia never declared independence from Yugoslavia, just was only remaining part of it. One argument beside this chronology is that Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and FYR Macedonia were not existed as an modern country and nation before independence from Yugoslavia. Serbia and Montenegro were founders of Yugoslavia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.134.105.71 (talk) 19:17, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

If UN recognized Serbia as a successor of SFRY than all of the medals from that period would be inherited by Serbia regardless of the number of Serbs, Croats, etc. in the team- that question is not and never will be in the hands of FIBA or any other international body but the UN. As it stands now,(and you can check this at the UN site and finish this debate- section with the list of member states) Serbia is a successor of FR Yugoslavia, but not of SFRY. UN considers that this country fell apart. Serbia's date of accession year to the UN is considered the year 2000- the year of FRY's accession, but with the reference, as it is the case with all of the six republics that they were a part of the founding nation of the UN, that is SFRY. I am Serb, I cheer for Serbia at the World Cup with all my heart, but these are the facts. P.S. Legally, Croatia, Macedonia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro were all 3 times World Champions in Basketball, while Serbia is 5 times world champion. Although Montenegro was part of the country that won World Cup title 5 times, it has a legal right to claim only 3 titles, cause Serbia is considered a successor state to FRY or Serbia and MN (hence, there was no need for Serbia to reapply to UN membership in 2006, while MN had to reapply). Cheers, Byxl... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Byxl (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

FIBA does NOT add the success of SFRY to this team

[26] (page 12) Please stop adding unsourced and wrong information. --Yoda1893 (talk) 23:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Neither it count medals of FR Yugoslavia to our team. Just post-2007 results.--AirWolf ^talk 12:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2014

93.87.142.54 (talk) 22:16, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2014

| fiba_ranking = 2 9 109.93.133.66 (talk) 19:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. FIBA still shows them as number 11 ([27]). Stickee (talk) 05:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Final disscussion: Results/medals history

Intro

After the breakup of Yugoslavia, SFR Yugoslavia ceased to exist and FR Yugoslavia was created- see United Nations Security Council Resolution 777. Therefore, all the results and medals before 1992 are not counted to the current team. Most of the FIBA.com pages clearly separated these periods (example of such page: [28])

The result of such consensus is the current article layout: ([29]). The discussion on pre-1992 results should finally be closed. Although several IP-s tried to revert the medals before 1992 from time to time, registered users were there to cut it almost immediately. This is a very positive sign which shows that consensus is respected.

Discussion

In 2006, Montenegro, country that was part of the state union FR Yugoslavia, declared independence. What is now becoming a legal problem is the fact that FIBA.com officially treats Serbia as a new country which play in the tournaments since 2007, although politically Serbia a successor state to the FR Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro state union) (see: [30], [31] etc). However, since Montenegro declared independence, IOC (International Olympic Committee) considered Serbia (SRB) as a new country, as well (see: [32]). FIBA.com started the same way: ([33], [34]).

All these comes with a lot of suspicion in my opinion, since Serbia was still in TOP 10 in 2007, 2008 in the FIBA Rankings, and you can see that formula for its points includes two past Olympic cycles (8 years). And the second questionable thing is that FIBA.com somewhere put SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia all together, somewhere separated. This could make some trouble dealing with later. Post-2007 Serbia results are separated.

However, I am for separating post-2007 results just for Serbia, and creating a new article for FR Yugoslavian national basketball team (or just adding content to SFR Yugoslavia national team and redirecting that page to just Yugoslavia national basketball team - of course with some good general description). Also, I agree that this move could be highly sensitive for Serbian people since they are emotionally connected to these results in my opinion. What do you think?--AirWolf ^talk 13:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

It looks like the FIBA ranking points for SFR Yugoslavia was carried over to FR Yugoslavia, which was then carried over to SCG, then finally to Serbia. However, it seems the FIBA archive has a team for each IOC code: so YUG, SCG & SRB are "3 different" teams; same with ROC & TPE, and URS & RUS (and CIS). It doesn't happen between FRG & GER, but GDR is a separate team. There's no clear-cut solution on how to deal with this.

As for successor states, that has nothing to do with this, and FIBA gets to decide who succeeds what and by what account. We can safely ignore the successor states problem. ROC and TPE records are at the Chinese Taipei national basketball team, same with FRG and GER at Germany national basketball team, while URS/CIS/RUS are separated, and SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia/SCG/Serbia are separated.

But, as far as medal tables are concerned, I'd say follow what the FIBA archive does. –HTD 13:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

• I have been requested to participate in this discussion by AirWolf, apparently because of my involvement in other sports-related topics. AirWolf and I have never discussed this issue, nor have I discussed it with anyone else, prior to now.

It is my opinion that we should follow the reliable sources regarding the treatment of Yugoslavia's sports history and whether it is part of the present Serbian nation's sports history. Yugoslavia was formerly a national confederation composed of the provinces/states of Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia, from 1918 until the early 1990s. The last rump of Yugoslavia broke apart in 2006, when Montenegrans voted to become independent of the rump Montenegro-Serbia confederation. Neither FIBA (the international governing body for basketball) nor the International Olympic Committee recognize Serbia as the successor state to Yugoslavia, but treat it as a newly independent country. IMHO, this is a sensible approach, because all six former Yugoslav states can credibly claim to be successor state to Yugoslavia, and the former Yugoslav national basketball and Olympic team were composed of athletes from all six constituent states. Bottom line: we should follow the reliable sources, and to my way of thinking, that means separate articles for the former Yugoslavian teams and the current Serbian teams -- including separate medals tables for Yugoslavia and Serbia. There is no reason, however, why these separate team articles should not be cross-referenced and cross-linked. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you both for participating in a discussion. Dirtlawyer1, please read my talk because from what you wrote, it looks like you haven't read it.We have already made a consensus before that pre-1992 results are not counted here, what we are talking now is the period 1992-2006. Thanks!--AirWolf ^talk 14:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

My answer remains the same: if FIBA and the IOC treat Serbia as a new member country as of 2006-07, so should Wikipedia. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:09, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Same opinion. Thanks.--AirWolf ^talk 14:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, I also think we should follow what reliable sources point to, i.e. treat Serbia as a different country. And I also came here because of an invitation to comment on the matter by AirWolf.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 14:33, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not so informed about basketball, however I do remember COI considering Serbia an only successor of all Yugoslavias a year ago. That happend because the spot of the Kingdom of Serbia, K. of SCS/Yugoslavia, SFR Yugoslavia, FR Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro, and current Serbia was allways the same. But seems COI updated some info by separating the medals, Ill try to see more.

PS: Dirtlawyer1 those states you mentioned and are independent nowadays, only begin existing as such in 1945, before that in the period of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia (1918 to WWII) there was no Macedonia, Bosnia, etc. See Subdivisions of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. FkpCascais (talk) 14:41, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Argument that "COI considering Serbia an only successor of all Yugoslavias a year ago" is not true. If you are willing to re-check your findings, maybe [35] can help you out. IOC sees Serbia (SRB) as sovereign country in the periods from 1910–1912 and from 2006-onward (see: Serbia at the Olympics, for codes: List of IOC country codes, website: [36]). That statement that it was part of now ceased countries doesn't make it a medal successor. Just like others said, we should stick to the reliable sources.--AirWolf ^talk 14:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

• I can't claim to understand all the subtleties of Balkan history, but since AirWolf asked for my opinion, I'll argue that we should simply follow whatever FIBA does. Just curious: FIBA doesn't recognize a Kosovo team, does it? Zagalejo^^^ 00:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Nope. Kosovo Membership.--AirWolf ^talk 19:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Serbia men's national basketball team/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

# Needs expansion of history Needs more reliable sources

Last edited at 22:39, 3 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 05:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 29 August 2016

Past rosters

{{Serbia Men Basketball Squad 2016 Summer Olympics}}
}}

Please remove the extraneous template closing tag there. Jerod Lycett (talk) 18:45, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

The extra closing braces are for the {{navboxes}} template 2 lines above, which is syntactically correct. Not done. non-admin response — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 04:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Bgwhite fixed the issue in the meantime. No such user (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 31 August 2016

Serbia should have all results from 1995. Appearances of Serbia and Montenegro are counted for the 2004 olympics but not for the 96 olympics where silver was won? All montenegrins i know support the Serbian national basketball team, because guess what.. theyre Serbs. Montenegro splitting off doesnt mean anything they're 2 Serbian states with Serbian people. For example there was only 1 montenegrin on the national basketball team at the atlanta olympics Zarko Paspalj, he considers himself a Serb and currently lives in Serbia.

Olympic games: 4 appearances 2 silvers 1996 2016 FIBA world cup: 5 appearances 2 golds 98 2002 1 silver 2014 Eurobasket: 12 appearances 3 golds 95 97 2001 1 silver 2009 1 bronze 1999

203.36.27.2 (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

It is not going to happen until a consensus about the article's temporal scope is reached. For what it's worth, the article has been stable until August 22, containing both Serbia and FRY history and results [37]. Then, on August 22, 62.4.55.64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) tried to expand the scope to include everything from 1936 [38], and an edit war ensued among registered editors and IPs alike.

However, I think that Wikipedia needs to be consistent with treatment of all Serbia national teams, which are almost universally legal successors of Serbia and Montenegro. Even if we agree that amount of Montenegrin players in the basketball team was relatively small, it was not so in the case of Serbia and Montenegro national water polo team, so it can be argued that it isn't exactly fair.

If it takes a formal RfC to settle the matters, let us have it. However, the practical compromise until recent brouhaha was that Yugoslavia national teams before 1991 have separate articles, while the information under "Serbia national teams" contained the Serbia&Montenegro (FRY) results as well. The matter was also discussed above, at #Final disscussion: Results/medals history back in 2014, which seems to have reached similar conclusion. No such user (talk) 09:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:30, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

First game, biggest win & lose

Hello everyone! I put a first match after 1991. for FR Yugoslavia, and also I put biggest win, and los DusanSilniVujovic (talk) 14:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

This article is utter nonsense

Russia was Soviet Union's successor, but does not get any achievent's made by Soviet Union. Including Serbia&Montenegro'S / Yugoslavia's achievents here, is ridiculous. FIBA includes only statistics from 2007 onwards. SOURCE. --Pelmeen10 (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Exactly, perfectly right!!!--2003:C8:7F21:595B:45B9:BDEC:5E10:AEB8 (talk) 22:02, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@Pelmeen10: Your comments are nonsense. Read this and everything will be clear.--Bozalegenda (talk) 22:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

That is not mentioning Yugoslavia. My source is taken directly from FIBA's homepage. --Pelmeen10 (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

This source is also from FIBA website (its just archived). And this is statement written by human, not some html code table. Serbia and Montenegro and FR Yugoslavia are one same thing. I dont know how you can not understand that.--Bozalegenda (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

We're not concerned with political entities and sovereign states here. The only thing we are concerned with is which sports teams these achievements were awarded to. And the achievements in question were not awarded to Serbia but to a team simply called "Yugoslavia".Tvx1 03:55, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Once again you are talking nonsense. SFR Yugoslavia and FR Yugoslavia were different countries. And FR Yugoslavia and Serbia and Montenegro are one same country, and Serbia is direct successor of that team and that is the reason why Serbia played at the Eurobasket 2007.--Bozalegenda (talk) 17:55, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Pelmeen10, Tvx1, and Bozalegenda: There was a discussion concerning this, with lot of material for consideration - Talk:Serbia_men's_national_basketball_team#Final_disscussion:_Results/medals_history. The concensus was to split 1991-2006 results/medals/history from the article and to create a new article about FR Yugoslavia, as FIBA and IOC consider Serbia as "new" country from 2006. I'll do it in free time.--AirWolf ^talk 12:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes I agree. FIBA actually credits all achievements from teams called Yugoslavia to one entity.Tvx1 12:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Tvx1: That's a problem then... SFR Yugoslavia from 1945 to 1992 (22mil nation) and FR Yugoslavia from 1992 to 2006 (7.5mil nation except Kosovo as disputed territory, with Kosovo 9.5mil nation) are completely different countries. I think that we shouldn't have results from 1992 to 2003 included in SFR Yugoslavia teams just because of names. Serbia and Montenegro is the same country as FR Yugoslavia, just under different name from 2003 to 2006. What's your opinion?
FIBA is very confusing about it. When Montenegro separated, it started in ranking from bottom, while Serbia preserved the position of FR Yugoslavia. Very confusing.--AirWolf ^talk 12:41, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Were not concerned with geopolitics here. Only with sportive results. If the official authority credits results to one entity, they credit them to one entity, period. The Kingdom of Yugoslavia was a different country too, yet we don't split these results either. There was clear continuity between the Yugoslavias. The national basketball federation kept operating from the same place with the same people.Tvx1 12:48, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Politically speaking, there's no single doubt that Serbia is the successor state of FR Yugoslavia/Serbia and Montenegro which lasted from 1991 to 2016. There's a lot of international documents that verify that. However, IOC and FIBA are having different opinions about it. IOC treats Serbia as its member from 1910 to 1918 and from 2006 onward. FIBA treats Serbia as new country in its history section from 2006. However, it treated Serbia as successor in tournaments and rankings when Montenegro split. That's why this is confusing. Politically, Serbia is successor of FR Yugoslavia (1992-2006), mainly because it has 93% of FR Yugoslavia population IMO. But IOC thinks otherwise. FIBA also.--AirWolf ^talk 12:56, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Also, do not avoid the importance of political decisions when national teams are concerned. They directly have an effect of national teams.--AirWolf ^talk 13:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Notable players

I believe there is no reason to have a section named "Notable players". There is no clear inclusion criteria, and also, there is just too much outdated information about the players. For example, the achievements of Vlade Divac include "One of only two basketball players born and trained in Europe (Dražen Petrović is the other) to have his number retired by an NBA team" and "One of only two basketball players born and trained in Europe (Dirk Nowitzki is the other) to play at least 1,000 NBA games (1,134)". Both of these statements are no longer valid. Also, Predrag Stojaković's positions on certain NBA all-time lists obviously haven't been updated in a while. But the main issue for me is the inclusion criteria. I can't find any reason to include these specific players, and exclude some others.--Vitriden (talk) 08:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I always find useful a section with notable people or players in such an article. Some players played for a national team had very notable careers and were very well know across the world. It is definitely not original research to have such a section as it was mentioned in the deletion comments, it has nothing to do with this. There is no research at all with no input and no results. However, I agree that some description in this section is outdated and should be improved or removed. As for the inclusion criteria, the list is not definite, any player with broad recognition for his achievements can be added into the list at any point of time. It in nothing more than some examples of notable players and such lists exist in many other similar team articles.--Clicklander (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

False and misleading statements for deletion. Also, criteria is very simple - awards with the national team and club honors. Keep the section.--AirWolf ^talk 11:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Most of these players only represented Yugoslavia. --Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:01, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

In addition to Pelmeen10's argument, the list suffers from being highly subjective. "Awards with the national team" and "club honors" are not clearly defined, and I bet that dozens of players who played for the team during the years have won at least one award somewhere. I might accept a compromise if we can clearly define inclusion criteria (e.g. being a MVP or in a championship team or a captain or something), but e.g. Kićanović and Dalipagić have never played for the team and ought to go. And certainly reduce the list of awards and titles to a single line, this is about the team, the rest can go to individual players articles. No such user (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

If there are players who have never played for the team, they should be removed from the list. As for the rest, the career highlights are to show why these players are notable and those achievements do not have necessarily to do with their contribution to this team. No specific criteria for inclusion to the list are required, again these players are just examples of notable players, and this is justified by what they have achieved in their career. --Clicklander (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

And how does listing extensive career highlights of individual players pertain to the article about the national team? They belong to articles about those players. If we have no specific criteria for inclusion of anything, and go by just examples inserted at editors' whim, the articles will soon get into WP:INDISCRIMINATE mess of barely relevant information, which is what that section is. No other national team article lists the notable players in so intricate detail, and the list of notable players should not need extensive justification what makes them notable. Please take a look at guidance in WP:SCOPE, this is a bad case of cruft. No such user (talk) 08:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@No such user: I want to help you here, but I would also like to have universal rule for all basketball national teams. I like the idea of having content similar to Lithuania_men's_national_basketball_team#Notable_players and also additional article like Medal winners in Lithuania men's national basketball team. You have mine consent if you make these changes and not just to remove excessive club achievements material. That's easy.--AirWolf ^talk 16:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, it would be nice if someone can create and retrieve information for such article for SFR Yugoslavia national team (1945-92).--AirWolf ^talk 16:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

What is the national game of serbia

What is the national game of serbia Jassi suthar (talk) 04:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)