Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Article topics
The following discussions related to article topics are requested to have community-wide attention: ()
Biographies
[edit]| Should B. R. Ambedkar be referred to as the "chief architect of the Indian Constitution" in the article's lead? |
| TLDR: Should the section be left there, or deleted?
Context is in conversation above. I am not very sure as to the verifiability, so I will hand the issue over to more knowledgeable individuals. On one hand, the section has been the stable version for quite a long time, and had sources which are also long-standing On the other hand, @User:Satheravi has raised new evidence which state otherwise, and i am not capable of discerning whether they "outweigh" the current sources. Help will be appreciated, and I will not try to bludgeon this any further if a consensus is reached, whatever the result is. —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 09:01, 3 March 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography
| MOS:NICKNAME says: "If a person is known by a nickname used in lieu of or in addition to a given name, and it is not a common hypocorism of one of their names, or a professional alias, it is usually presented between double quotation marks following the last given name or initial." Does that apply only to nicknames that are our article titles, or to all nicknames that are sufficiently prominent to be in the lead sentence? --GRuban (talk) 21:35, 25 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the article have an infobox? Dronebogus (talk) 12:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC) |
| What should we do with the article's name and pronouns? (CC) Tbhotch™ 01:08, 24 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Can Wilt Chamberlain be called the greatest player of all-time? Yes or no? Sources offered for the claim thus far.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] Left guide (talk) 20:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the sentence "His political activities and views have made him a polarizing figure." be added to the end of the opening paragraph to further establish context for notability, and to include links to child articles earlier in lead? RFCBEFORE: here and here. Edit: corrected the wikilinks as shown in diff.
Yes/No. Feel free to suggest alternative wording, the above is based on current lead wording.[3] CNC (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should this page use Infobox officeholder with his position as head of DOGE at the top, or Infobox person with DOGE listed under occupations? Yeshivish613 (talk) 01:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should RFK Jr. Be called an anti-vaccine activist and a conspiracy theorist in the first sentence? Wikieditor662 (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Wendy Rogers (politician)
| I was recently reverted for removing the label "far-right" and want to hear some more opinions.
Should this article label Wendy Rogers as "far-right" in the opening sentence? 77.22.168.65 (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Which image should be used in the Infobox? There has been consistent edit warring and changes to the infobox image since October. [4] A discussion was had on which - or if any - image should be used to depict Yasuke (link to discussion topic) where no consensus was reached. Two of the images (the Sumō Yūrakuzu Byōbu and Rinpa Suzuri-bako) are discussed as possible depictions by sources and discussed on the page already. For more information on the sources, Rotary Engine compiled the current mentions in their comment (here). Another option proposed using a modern artwork depiction by Anthony Azekwoh. Another option was to use no image in the infobox at all. Relm (talk) 09:52, 7 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Is it appropriate to include the statement "In general, a Muslim Mappila is a descendant of Hindu lower-caste natives who converted to Islam"--Imperial[AFCND] 14:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should we list the upcoming Mayhem album as number 7 or number 8 in Gaga's album numbering scheme, should we refrain from mentioning the number, or should we tell the reader how both numbers have been supported? In any case, should we add an explicit note about the contradictions in the numbering labels given by the media?
Please answer 7, 8, refrain or both, with the optional add note. Binksternet (talk) 06:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
Economy, trade, and companies
[edit]Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Is Benzinga [5]:
|
History and geography
[edit]| Should the opinions of scholars who dispute that Syria was a totalitarian regime and state that instead it was authoritarian added to this article? I added the opinion of such scholars, but Quetstar, has reverted all my edits on the grounds that there are quantitatively more sources calling Syria totalitarian and demanded to put this topic on RfC. 89.107.138.64 (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC) |
What weight should the following viewpoints be given in the Recognition of Israel section, in terms of prominence and proximity to each other? The latest round of the discussion can be found here but there were many related discussions and I believe that at this point we need external input.
Options
|
How should the team's location be indicated at the end of the first sentence?
|
There are nine questions, three concerning Second Vienna Award and six concerning Northern Transylvania:
|
| Proposed changes
About : This article is about Israel’s genocide in Gaza. SD : Israel’s genocide in Gaza during the Gaza War. --Update-- Alternate shorter SD proposal after discussion Israel’s genocide in Gaza (2023–present) Yes/No. Feel free to suggest alternative wording, Astropulse (talk) 17:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip
| Given the importance of the bombings of Dresden, Hamburg, and London to the lede of this article, it has been proposed that the combined death toll (102,000) of those bombings be added as well.
See previous discussion here. Options: |
| Hello, I have recieved information from the Lumbee tribe that may be helpful, however, the info was recently disputed by other editors, like the information relating to the Cherokee. I put a list of websites/sources I recieved below.
Lumbee congress report Timeline of the Lumbee tribe Bill introduced by Richard Hudson to formally recognize the Lumbee tribe The Lumbee Indians: an annotated bibliography Please note that I am NOT affiliated with the Lumbee tribe in any way whatsoever, and I am trying to help them get consensus for this information.DACartman (talk) 21:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
| Should we delete order numberings from infoboxes of office holders? See previous related discussions: |
Considering the prevailing guidance at MOS:INFOBOX, WP:RESULT and the documentation at Template: Infobox military conflict should the result in the infobox be:
Where Outcome and negotiation is the section in the article (equivalent to an Aftermath section) where the result of the war is discussed. Cinderella157 (talk) 08:42, 8 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Which image should be used in the Infobox? There has been consistent edit warring and changes to the infobox image since October. [6] A discussion was had on which - or if any - image should be used to depict Yasuke (link to discussion topic) where no consensus was reached. Two of the images (the Sumō Yūrakuzu Byōbu and Rinpa Suzuri-bako) are discussed as possible depictions by sources and discussed on the page already. For more information on the sources, Rotary Engine compiled the current mentions in their comment (here). Another option proposed using a modern artwork depiction by Anthony Azekwoh. Another option was to use no image in the infobox at all. Relm (talk) 09:52, 7 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Is it appropriate to include the statement "In general, a Muslim Mappila is a descendant of Hindu lower-caste natives who converted to Islam"--Imperial[AFCND] 14:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
Language and linguistics
[edit]An Executive Order was signed today, March 1, by President Trump titled "Designating English as the Language of the United States". The main portions of note are within Section 3. Designating an Official Language for the United States:
That being said, Executive Orders are not legislation and are limited to the Executive Branch's interpretation of existing law. They can also be overturned by the next president. This EO also seems to be largely symbolic and does not require any substantial changes to federal programs per the NYT, except that agencies are no longer required to support "programs for people with limited English proficiency" per NPR. Usually, from what I can tell as well, official languages of countries are designated either in a country's constitution or through the legislative process. There have also been attempts to codify English as the official language through legislative means with more teeth, force of law, and would require official documents, laws, communications, and such, to be in English, as mentioned in the article English Language Unity Act and as seen by H.R. 997 from the 118th Congress, but those efforts have never been signed into law. However, there is an argument that the Executive Branch could set policy in this space, though it is unprecedented. There's also a middle ground, such as including a note stating that "English is the official language of the Executive Branch per EO [number], but is not stated in the constitution or in federal law", similar to the way that we currently do for states. There's also an argument to wait and see how folks react. As such here are the options I envisioned, though I am open to other options. Should we include "English" as the official language of the United States?
Note that there is another RFC taking place at Talk:Languages of the United States § English as official language AG202 (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Languages of the United States
| On March 1, 2025, President Donald Trump has signed and published the executive order "Designating English as the Official Language of The United States". The full text is available here. This has been WP:BOLDly reflected in the article, but since it is likely to be challenged by some editors, I'm creating this request for comment to get consensus on how we should handle this.
The order plainly states that it makes no legal change except for rescinding Executive Order 13166; agencies are no longer required to provide services or documents in languages other than English, but are not directed to necessarily make any changes. The order does designate English as the United States' official language, even if no changes to the legal code have been made. — gabldotink [ talk | contribs | global account ] 01:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC) |
Template talk:IPA pulmonic consonants
| Should the order of the rows of the table be changed?
Specifically, it is proposed that the nasal, trill and tap/flap rows be moved immediately before the fricatives (diff). Kanguole 11:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Trump derangement syndrome
Should a 2021 peer-reviewed research study be mentioned in the article?
|
Maths, science, and technology
[edit]| Should the paragraphs of the proposed revised lede shown below replace the current lede section of the Autism article? |
| The neutral point of view policy requires that articles "represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic". Does the Autism article as a whole currently overemphasize the clinical/medical model of disability viewpoint relative to the social/neurodiversity viewpoint? |
Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard
| Is the view that transgender identities are, in themselves, a mental illness or otherwise frequently caused by mental illness WP:FRINGE within the bounds of mainstream medicine and international human rights? Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:01, 17 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should RFK Jr. Be called an anti-vaccine activist and a conspiracy theorist in the first sentence? Wikieditor662 (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
| How should the Glacier article describe the relationship between rocks and glaciers? Lordgilman (talk) 14:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Louis Wain having schizophrenia is speculation done after his death, as his official diagnosis —while he was alive— was only of insanity. (1)
The paintings presented in the "timeline" also lack dates so the order is, therefore, inaccurate. (2) "Attributed by some" is not a real source and is rather vague, convenient wording. The inclusion of Louis Wain's drawings does not contribute anything to the article, and can even perpetuate very harmful myths. 186.11.20.206 (talk) 05:57, 8 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Weather
| How should articles deal with damage estimates for weather events? Departure– (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the following sentences be removed from the Lead of Polyvagal Theory?
There is consensus among experts that the assumptions of the polyvagal theory are untenable.[12] Ian Oelsner (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC) |
Art, architecture, literature, and media
[edit]Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Album article style advice
| Should bonus tracks or other alternative tracklistings be included in album articles?--3family6 (Talk to me|See what I have done) 13:08, 3 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the label as a 'British' show be removed from the articles opening sentence? IrishReader1996 (talk) 22:07, 2 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the article have an infobox? Dronebogus (talk) 12:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers
| Film gauge is a measure of the width of photo and movie films, and is written as the width of the film in millimeters followed by the unit “mm”. Film gauges can be written either with a space (35 mm film), without a space (35mm film), or with a hyphen (35-mm film).
In the context of film gauges, should Wikipedia:
and... Should a statement specifying which style to use be added to MOS:NUM under the Specific units section, and/or to MOS:FILM under the Guidelines for related topics section? ~ Nikoledood (talk) 12:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Which of the following should be the lead image? 01:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
| Should we move the Daily Express from "Generally unreliable" on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources to "Deprecated"? Helper201 (talk) 00:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
What is the reliability of CNET, following its purchase by Ziff Davis in October 2024:
|
| Should RFK Jr. Be called an anti-vaccine activist and a conspiracy theorist in the first sentence? Wikieditor662 (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should we list the upcoming Mayhem album as number 7 or number 8 in Gaga's album numbering scheme, should we refrain from mentioning the number, or should we tell the reader how both numbers have been supported? In any case, should we add an explicit note about the contradictions in the numbering labels given by the media?
Please answer 7, 8, refrain or both, with the optional add note. Binksternet (talk) 06:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film
Per the above thread, regarding the {{Rotten Tomatoes prose}} and {{Metacritic film prose}} templates, what is the best way to handle them?
|
| Should the first sentence of the third lead paragraph read:
Fox News has been characterized by many as a propaganda organization. Here is a previous discussion. Also see: Fox News#Political alignment in the body. soibangla (talk) 06:03, 5 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
| Should the Encyclopaedia Metallum (also known as Metal Archives) be deprecated? Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC) |
Politics, government, and law
[edit]| Should the opinions of scholars who dispute that Syria was a totalitarian regime and state that instead it was authoritarian added to this article? I added the opinion of such scholars, but Quetstar, has reverted all my edits on the grounds that there are quantitatively more sources calling Syria totalitarian and demanded to put this topic on RfC. 89.107.138.64 (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the United States section mention Elon Musk? 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me! 17:34, 6 March 2025 (UTC) |
| TLDR: Should the section be left there, or deleted?
Context is in conversation above. I am not very sure as to the verifiability, so I will hand the issue over to more knowledgeable individuals. On one hand, the section has been the stable version for quite a long time, and had sources which are also long-standing On the other hand, @User:Satheravi has raised new evidence which state otherwise, and i am not capable of discerning whether they "outweigh" the current sources. Help will be appreciated, and I will not try to bludgeon this any further if a consensus is reached, whatever the result is. —Mint Keyphase (Did I mess up? What have I done?) 09:01, 3 March 2025 (UTC) |
What weight should the following viewpoints be given in the Recognition of Israel section, in terms of prominence and proximity to each other? The latest round of the discussion can be found here but there were many related discussions and I believe that at this point we need external input.
Options
|
An Executive Order was signed today, March 1, by President Trump titled "Designating English as the Language of the United States". The main portions of note are within Section 3. Designating an Official Language for the United States:
That being said, Executive Orders are not legislation and are limited to the Executive Branch's interpretation of existing law. They can also be overturned by the next president. This EO also seems to be largely symbolic and does not require any substantial changes to federal programs per the NYT, except that agencies are no longer required to support "programs for people with limited English proficiency" per NPR. Usually, from what I can tell as well, official languages of countries are designated either in a country's constitution or through the legislative process. There have also been attempts to codify English as the official language through legislative means with more teeth, force of law, and would require official documents, laws, communications, and such, to be in English, as mentioned in the article English Language Unity Act and as seen by H.R. 997 from the 118th Congress, but those efforts have never been signed into law. However, there is an argument that the Executive Branch could set policy in this space, though it is unprecedented. There's also a middle ground, such as including a note stating that "English is the official language of the Executive Branch per EO [number], but is not stated in the constitution or in federal law", similar to the way that we currently do for states. There's also an argument to wait and see how folks react. As such here are the options I envisioned, though I am open to other options. Should we include "English" as the official language of the United States?
Note that there is another RFC taking place at Talk:Languages of the United States § English as official language AG202 (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:National Socialist Network
| In the 2025 section, should they be described as "charged with carrying offensive weapons or articles of disguise" or "charged with possessing articles of disguise"? FoundSquare (talk) FoundSquare (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Languages of the United States
| On March 1, 2025, President Donald Trump has signed and published the executive order "Designating English as the Official Language of The United States". The full text is available here. This has been WP:BOLDly reflected in the article, but since it is likely to be challenged by some editors, I'm creating this request for comment to get consensus on how we should handle this.
The order plainly states that it makes no legal change except for rescinding Executive Order 13166; agencies are no longer required to provide services or documents in languages other than English, but are not directed to necessarily make any changes. The order does designate English as the United States' official language, even if no changes to the legal code have been made. — gabldotink [ talk | contribs | global account ] 01:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Trump derangement syndrome
Should a 2021 peer-reviewed research study be mentioned in the article?
|
Talk:2025 German federal election
There has been discussion, intially over whether to include the BSW in the infobox, that has since grown to encompass the inclusion the FDP and SSW.
Should we:
|
| Should the sentence "His political activities and views have made him a polarizing figure." be added to the end of the opening paragraph to further establish context for notability, and to include links to child articles earlier in lead? RFCBEFORE: here and here. Edit: corrected the wikilinks as shown in diff.
Yes/No. Feel free to suggest alternative wording, the above is based on current lead wording.[7] CNC (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should this page use Infobox officeholder with his position as head of DOGE at the top, or Infobox person with DOGE listed under occupations? Yeshivish613 (talk) 01:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Kevin Roberts (political strategist)
| Should the lead of the Kevin Roberts article include a basic sentence on why Project 2025 is controversial, using a sentence such as "which critics accuse of being unconstitutional, anti-democratic, and pro-authoritarian"? Summerfell1978 (talk) 23:21, 15 February 2025 (UTC) |
| What should the political position/positions in the infobox be? I'm bringing this up again as the subject has arisen again by another editor without a clear resolution. Please see Talk:Indian National Congress/Archive 5#Centre to centre-left, Talk:Indian National Congress/Archive 5#RFC Political position and Talk:Indian National Congress#Political position sources for prior discussions. Helper201 (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip
| Given the importance of the bombings of Dresden, Hamburg, and London to the lede of this article, it has been proposed that the combined death toll (102,000) of those bombings be added as well.
See previous discussion here. Options: |
Should Elon Musk's name and title or non-title be listed in some form (the details of which should be determined through a separate discussion) in the list of principal officials in the Government section of the infobox?
|
| Should RFK Jr. Be called an anti-vaccine activist and a conspiracy theorist in the first sentence? Wikieditor662 (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
Should the current lead image (as seen to the right) remain? _crop.jpg) |
Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
| Should we delete order numberings from infoboxes of office holders? See previous related discussions: |
Considering the prevailing guidance at MOS:INFOBOX, WP:RESULT and the documentation at Template: Infobox military conflict should the result in the infobox be:
Where Outcome and negotiation is the section in the article (equivalent to an Aftermath section) where the result of the war is discussed. Cinderella157 (talk) 08:42, 8 February 2025 (UTC) |
Talk:2028 United States presidential election
| Should the potential candidates sections be removed in the article? elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 05:03, 8 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the first sentence of the third lead paragraph read:
Fox News has been characterized by many as a propaganda organization. Here is a previous discussion. Also see: Fox News#Political alignment in the body. soibangla (talk) 06:03, 5 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Since the previous discussions above didn't come to a clear consensus. Should the infobox say "centre to centre-left" or just "centre-left"? -- FMSky (talk) 21:05, 4 February 2025 (UTC) |
Religion and philosophy
[edit]Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles
Should the text of MOS:CALLIGRAPHY be
|
| Is it appropriate to include the statement "In general, a Muslim Mappila is a descendant of Hindu lower-caste natives who converted to Islam"--Imperial[AFCND] 14:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
Society, sports, and culture
[edit]| There's been a lot of changes to both the lede image and the one in § Attributes, and discussions so far have been inconclusive, so it's probably time to have an RfC to get a formal consensus. I don't really like image RfCs but it's better than edit-warring. Below I've listed the four images that have been used in one or both of those slots, plus three mentioned by Ca above. If there's any previously used/proposed images that I've missed, or if anyone has other images to propose (see c:Category:Femboy), feel free to add them. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 07:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the paragraphs of the proposed revised lede shown below replace the current lede section of the Autism article? |
| The neutral point of view policy requires that articles "represent fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic". Does the Autism article as a whole currently overemphasize the clinical/medical model of disability viewpoint relative to the social/neurodiversity viewpoint? |
How should the team's location be indicated at the end of the first sentence?
|
| Can Wilt Chamberlain be called the greatest player of all-time? Yes or no? Sources offered for the claim thus far.[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] Left guide (talk) 20:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC) |
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football
| Hi there, as I saw some suggestions in the AfD discussion here, due to the scope of the request, and the fact some people seemingly are opposed to my proposal, here's the RfC.
What action, if any, should we do with the following class of articles that are about seasons of American football college teams? Szmenderowiecki (talk) 18:39, 21 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Which of the following should be the lead image? 01:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Is it appropriate for this article to include the material about grooming gangs currently included here, either in its present form or modified? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:49, 15 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should RFK Jr. Be called an anti-vaccine activist and a conspiracy theorist in the first sentence? Wikieditor662 (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should the current lead image (as seen to the right) remain? |
Considering the prevailing guidance at MOS:INFOBOX, WP:RESULT and the documentation at Template: Infobox military conflict should the result in the infobox be:
Where Outcome and negotiation is the section in the article (equivalent to an Aftermath section) where the result of the war is discussed. Cinderella157 (talk) 08:42, 8 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Is it appropriate to include the statement "In general, a Muslim Mappila is a descendant of Hindu lower-caste natives who converted to Islam"--Imperial[AFCND] 14:08, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
| Should we list the upcoming Mayhem album as number 7 or number 8 in Gaga's album numbering scheme, should we refrain from mentioning the number, or should we tell the reader how both numbers have been supported? In any case, should we add an explicit note about the contradictions in the numbering labels given by the media?
Please answer 7, 8, refrain or both, with the optional add note. Binksternet (talk) 06:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC) |
- ^ "Amazon.com: The Greatest Player Ever: Wilt Chamberlain (himself), Cecil Mosenson: Movies & TV". www.amazon.com. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Swartz, Bryn. "The Greatest NBA Player of All-Time: Michael Jordan or Wilt Chamberlain?". Bleacher Report. Archived from the original on April 30, 2022. Retrieved April 30, 2022.
- ^ Smith, Steve. "Greatness Revisited: Why Wilt Chamberlain Was the Greatest NBA Player Ever". Bleacher Report. Archived from the original on April 30, 2022. Retrieved April 30, 2022.
- ^ "The NBA's true greatest player of all time, Wilt Chamberlain". Hoops Habit. April 29, 2020. Archived from the original on September 12, 2021. Retrieved April 30, 2022.
- ^ "Legends profile: Wilt Chamberlain". NBA.com. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Acedera, Shane Garry (11 November 2023). "Gary Payton explains why Wilt Chamberlain is the greatest player ever: "You know everybody is chasing after him"". Basketball Network - Your daily dose of basketball. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Carter, Richard G. (19 May 2023). "Wilt Chamberlain is the Greatest Pro Basketball Player of all Time". Shepherd Express. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ "THE WORLD'S GREATEST POST-WAR ERA ATHLETE HAILED FROM PHILLY - WILT CHAMBERLAIN!". Edge of Philly Sports Network. 22 December 2022. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Dresden (2025-02-07). "Dresden historical commission publishes final report". www.dresden.de. Retrieved 2025-02-08.
- ^ a b Blakemore, Erin (22 July 2021). "The bombing of Hamburg foreshadowed the horrors of Hiroshima". National Geographic. Archived from the original on 22 July 2021.
- ^ Richards, Denis. *Royal Air Force 1939–1945: The Fight at Odds*, vol. I, London: HMSO, 1974 (orig. 1953), p. 217. [1]
- ^ Grossman, Paul (2023). "Fundamental challenges and likely refutations of the five basic premises of the polyvagal theory". Biological Psychology. 180. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2023.108589. PMID 37230290.
- ^ Dresden (2025-02-07). "Dresden historical commission publishes final report". www.dresden.de. Retrieved 2025-02-08.
- ^ Richards, Denis. *Royal Air Force 1939–1945: The Fight at Odds*, vol. I, London: HMSO, 1974 (orig. 1953), p. 217. [2]
- ^ "Amazon.com: The Greatest Player Ever: Wilt Chamberlain (himself), Cecil Mosenson: Movies & TV". www.amazon.com. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Swartz, Bryn. "The Greatest NBA Player of All-Time: Michael Jordan or Wilt Chamberlain?". Bleacher Report. Archived from the original on April 30, 2022. Retrieved April 30, 2022.
- ^ Smith, Steve. "Greatness Revisited: Why Wilt Chamberlain Was the Greatest NBA Player Ever". Bleacher Report. Archived from the original on April 30, 2022. Retrieved April 30, 2022.
- ^ "The NBA's true greatest player of all time, Wilt Chamberlain". Hoops Habit. April 29, 2020. Archived from the original on September 12, 2021. Retrieved April 30, 2022.
- ^ "Legends profile: Wilt Chamberlain". NBA.com. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Acedera, Shane Garry (11 November 2023). "Gary Payton explains why Wilt Chamberlain is the greatest player ever: "You know everybody is chasing after him"". Basketball Network - Your daily dose of basketball. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ Carter, Richard G. (19 May 2023). "Wilt Chamberlain is the Greatest Pro Basketball Player of all Time". Shepherd Express. Retrieved 16 February 2025.
- ^ "THE WORLD'S GREATEST POST-WAR ERA ATHLETE HAILED FROM PHILLY - WILT CHAMBERLAIN!". Edge of Philly Sports Network. 22 December 2022. Retrieved 16 February 2025.