Talk:Fab Five

message: The link to *Willie Mcgee* in the following paragraph is misleading:
" The Akron Fab Five, who won a national high school basketball championship, best known to be Lebron James's high school. There is also a book about them that James wrote, Shooting Stars , and a movie, More Than a Game
Lebron James, Dru Joyce, Sian Cotton, >>>>>Willie Mcgee<<<<<, and Romeo Travis"
The link is taking you to the Baseball player Willie Mcgee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.62.197.222 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 5 July 2010
:. Station1 (talk) 23:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad link

message: Per discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation/Archive_25#dab_page_for_neologism_of_multiple_sports_teams, a disambiguation page should point to other articles about specific Fab Fives, and should not list each member of the various incarnations. The various Fab Five entries are subject to WP:NEO.  They should be made into separate articles if notable per WP:NEO, and then this dab page should disambiguate the new article(s). If its not worthy of a separate page, it should be removed from this page. —Bagumba (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not an acceptable rule of thumb.  There will be readers seeking other topics under the name "Fab Five"; there's no reason to leave them hanging just because we don't have a unique article for that particular use.  Powers T 03:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Per WP:NEO, the entry might be more suitable for Wiktionary.  Imagine if a term was not part of an existing disambiguation page, there is no way an article with a one line definition would not be deleted.  Similarly, a disambiguation should not be a dumping ground for defining terms without articles (or sections in the articles) about the term.  MOS:DABENTRY is specific about only one link per entry, not five individual links to so-called "Fab Five" members that shed no information on the group "Fab Five".—Bagumba (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup needed 

message: I don't get what's the problem with including the 1948 Kentucky Wildcats men's basketball team--the ORIGINAL "Fabulous Five".  They not only won the school's (and Rupp's) first championship, but also the Olympic gold medal.  They were the "Fab Five" long before the 1993 Michigan team, who in fact got their title stripped by the NCAA a few years later.75.81.197.59 (talk) 03:10, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with the proposed entry above is that neither Kentucky Wildcats nor Adolph Rupp mentions nothing about Fab Five. Also, per MOS:DABENTRY, only one blue link should exist per entry. After doing some research, it seems that "Fabulous Five" is the term usually associated with the 1948 Kentucky team, not "Fab Five".  There is also an existing article, Fabulous Five (Kentucky Wildcats).  Without quibbling about whether Fab Five is often used to describe the 1948 team, I propose to include Fabulous Five (Kentucky Wildcats) under the "See also section" per WP:MOSDAB#"See also" section —Bagumba (talk) 06:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Also, the text needs to be shortened as it should not be a dictionary definition per WP:DABNOT —Bagumba (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just figured it was common sense that "Fab Five" is short for "Fabulous Five".  I guess putting it in the "See Also" section makes sense.  It just seems grossly unfair that the '48 Cats are not included when they were the Fabulous/Fab Five long before the 1993 Michigan team (which in fact got their nickname/runner-up title stripped by the NCAA).75.81.197.59 (talk) 18:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia is not for righting great wrongs.  It's for subjects which are notable, which "Fabulous Five" seems to be.  It's more new school to call it "Fab Five" in reference to Kentucky, but it doesnt seem to be used often, so seems like a neologism which makes it a word to watch in WP.  The Kentucky team had its own point-shaving scandal, so neither team is without faults, but that is irrelevant for notability.  —Bagumba (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 1948 Kentucky Wildcats should be included 

message: The last time anyone called that team the Fab Five was in 2012. Also the first time. Putting that article in this list was pure WP:RECENTISM, and leaving it there is a mistake. For a recent article about the team, see this one. It even mentions the "Fab Five" idea was shot down within the team itself. Certainly, the unsourced claim "Most people still call them the fab five" in the discussion four years ago isn't true now (if it was ever true). 
I'm suggesting removing the Fierce Five link from the list and putting that into the "See Also" section.  It's the more appropriate place for an article that doesn't have the same name but is related in a tangential way. Rockypedia (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Disambiguation page are meant to get readers to the article they want.  It's neither here nor there if they remember a dated term, just get them the information they are seeking.  eonline.com wrote on July 11, 2016: "The Fierce Five (or Fab Five, depending on who you ask) ..."   Right or wrong, it's not totally unexpected some people would still know them as "Fab Five". I believe the entry should instead remain in the main disambiguation area, not in the "See also" section as was moved with an edit summary as "uncontentious" after less than half a day with no response.  "See also" is meant for misspellings, or terms commonly confused.  Fab Five is neither for the gymnastics team, as it is a former name for the group mentioned in the lead of Fierce Five.  As such, I would recommend something similar to the James Carrey example at MOS:DABREDIR. Namely, list the term in the disambiguation page title, then mention the more common term, e.g. "Fab Five or Fierce Five, the United States women's artistic gymnastics team at the 2012 Summer Olympics".—Bagumba (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gymnastics Fierce Five in 2016