Talk:2005 FIBA Americas Championship

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Basketball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Basketball on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BasketballWikipedia:WikiProject BasketballTemplate:WikiProject BasketballBasketball articles

Caribbean Low‑importance

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Standings

I can not figure out why FIBA Americas has Panama with a 2-7 record and is missing wins for almost all of the countries. I cannot understand why a 5-3 Panama team was bypassed for a 4-4 United States team for the knockout round. I cannot figure out why that 4-4 United States team would be seeded above either the 5-3 Brazil or 5-3 Venezuela team. If someone can explain this (I left above the standings the obvious problems), I'd be greatly appreciative. Pat Maher 02:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To answer my own question, FIBA Americas seems to have done their standings wrong. USA Basketball has the right standings at http://www.usabasketball.com/men/2005/05_mtoa_results.html that make sense by removing games against Canada and Mexico from the standings. Pat Maher 02:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:FIBAAmericas2005Logo.gif

Image:FIBAAmericas2005Logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third brazilian title

The 2005 title was the third one to the brazilians. Brazil won the 1988 championship. FIBA archive, for some unknown reason, just changed the winner and runner up places on the final match. I've already sent various e-mails to FIBA-Americas to correct that and got no response. On the talk pages of the championship in both english and portuguese wikipedia links to various reliable sources as brazilian basketball federation, puerto rican basketball federation, El Nuevo Herald (biggest american spanic newspaper), The San Juan Star (biggest puerto rican newspaper) and argentine newspapers confirms that FIBA archive is wrong. I'll not rewrite or copy and paste it here. I'll just post here the links to the english and portuguese wikipedia articles talk pages.

I corrected the article and erased the links to the FIBA archive site with wrong information. 189.19.115.171 (talk) 12:15, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]