Talk:List of sports figures considered the greatest

This list is still very weak and Americanized. Literally, it's still a very cringeworthy list. While in the American football table, there are 5 to 10 players per position on the field (which is correct, because it's extremely subjective and over the decades more people will still appear), in normal football, which you call associated football, which is the most practiced sport in the world, there are only 4 people, and there should be a list at the same level as American football. The fact that there are no people like Pelé on this list is cringeworthy. F1 Jim Clark? Only if it's for the English, a lot of people from all over the world recognize Ayrton Senna as the greatest in history because of his ability and not because of his numbers. In the combat sports section, why isn't there Teddy Riner from judo, for example? Where's taekwondo, karate, etc.? Where's MMA and people like Anderson Silva or a Gracie? Where's track and field separated by each sport? Pole vaulting - Armand Duplantis? Shot put - Ryan Crouser and so on? Where's table tennis (Ma Long), weightlifting, etc? 2804:F04:9066:DF00:46C3:B0E2:C00F:8144 (talk) 09:39, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

The athletes you suggested are noted. I added Ma Long. Will look into sources for the others (I'm sure sources exist for at least some of the ones you mentioned). As for positions, the American football ones just had more sourced entries from what I was initially able to find. Though, as per the above Widespread views discussion, these positional lists will be tweaked. But yeah, as aforementioned the athletes you linked are noted. Keeping in mind this list was only made in March, here's some links I think are also useful: WP:WIP, WP:NOTPERFECT. Soulbust (talk) 05:15, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

OK, I understand.

I'll help you with normal football (associated football): There are many lists made by newspapers, magazines and others, about the best players in history by position. I recommend putting the 5 best by position, so as not to make a very long list.

List of goalkeepers made by France Football, being the 5 best: Lev Yashin. Gordon Banks, Dino Zoff, Gianluigi Buffon and Manuel Neuer.^[1][2]

List of defenders made by the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de São Paulo, being the 5 best: Franz Beckenbauer. Franco Baresi, Fabio Cannavaro, Matthias Sammer and Ronald Koeman. ^[3]

List of full-backs made by the English magazine FourFourTwo, being the 5 best: Paolo Maldini, Roberto Carlos, Carlos Alberto Torres, Dani Alves and Philipp Lahm.^[4]

List of midfielders made by the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de São Paulo, with the 5 best: Diego Maradona, Zinédine Zidane, Zico, Johan Cruyff and Didi. ^[5]

List of forwards made by the Brazilian newspaper O Estado de São Paulo, with the 5 best: Pelé. Lionel Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo, Garrincha and Ronaldo Nazário.^[6]

It may not be perfect, but it comes very close to the reality I imagine it to be. It's a good start, and can be improved later.2804:F04:9066:DF00:594C:1459:9578:20AE (talk) 18:28, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Gonna go through your edits later tonight. Am currently in the middle of something very important off Wikipedia, but checked this site out of habit. Skimmed through your edits and your talk page message here. Gonna most likely have to undo a lot of it. This list isn't gonna be about athletes considered the second or third or whatever other greatest. The aim was the singular greatest as per sourcing. Please see above discussion. If any other editors think we should move the goalpost there and include sourcing for athletes simply listed anywhere other than at the top or first on such lists, then maybe we can revisit this idea. Also the addition of this source doesn't work at all. It's listing drivers by wins, so obviously Hamilton is listed first without any analysis/opinion added. That list already exists, and would make this list redundant and unnecessary bloat if it was just stat-based. Also, using that source for Schumacher or Senna, as you did doesn't work for the reason I mentioned: we're going off sourcing that lists athletes as the best. Even if such a stat-based listing/ranking was to be applicable for this list as a source (I would vehemently disagree with that), Senna is listed as 6th on that one. Just simply won't do. This opens it up to way too much cruft potential/ambiguity. Keeping it to athletes that are only listed/mentioned/opined as #1, the best, or the greatest keeps it clear what this page is about. Soulbust (talk) 02:30, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

It is not possible to choose a single GOAT for sports that have been around for 100 years or more, continuously, with dozens of historically important athletes, as is the case in association football or F1, and the trend over time is this in all sports. So what can be done is a list of those who can be considered the greatest in the sport. On this page, the American Football section is like this, you put a table with more than 50 players as GOAT. This is not a phenomenon unique to American football. It also happens with "normal" football, F1 and others. Numbers are not exactly the only criterion to define GOAT because there are people who were GOATs who died in the middle of their careers, suffered accidents and became physically disabled, etc. In the case of F1, for example, if you don't have the best car throughout your career, you can't do what Schumacher and Hamilton did. F1 is only a sport in part, because you can be the best driver in the galaxy, but if they give you bad cars, you won't win anything. Senna didn't have the best car for several years and died in the middle of his career, and he is considered better than them by many experts. Another obvious problem with the GOAT criterion using only numbers is that a GOAT from 1960 cannot beat the numbers of a GOAT from 2025 due to the difference in the number of competitions and games that exist today compared to what existed in the past. See, the name of this page is "List of sports figures considered the greatest". So, what I did is correct. It is wrong to single out one person when there is no way to explicitly prove it and there are several very high-level athletes from different eras that raise doubts even among experts. It is possible to choose a single GOAT in sports such as athletics or swimming where one can actually prove by the achievements (world record and several Olympic and world gold medals) that the person is indisputably the best. But in team sports, F1 and the like, where subjectivity is great, this is impossible.2804:F04:903F:AF00:508:EE79:7219:73CD (talk) 11:01, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, but I agree with Soulbust on this one. For better or worse, there are plenty of sources that make categorical statements as to who is the "GOAT" in F1. The American football table will probably be cut down, so it's not a good comparison point. Alyo (chat·edits) 13:24, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

You can have your own personal opinion, but the fact is that F1 is not a real sport because it does not depend solely on the individual to obtain results. If you do not drive one of the 3 best cars in the category that year, ideally the best, you can be a Driving God and will not achieve anything. There is no point in pointing out only Hamilton or Schumacher because of numbers, numbers do not have as much value in F1 because of that. Many even point to these two as "manufactured GOATs" because they were favored their entire lives. Schumacher was nicknamed "Dick Dastardly" because he not only robbed people like his number 2 driver Rubens Barrichello who had the talent to beat him, but also for deliberately crashing and committing several illegalities to win. The history of this "sport" is long and full of problems.2804:F04:903F:AF00:508:EE79:7219:73CD (talk) 15:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

That's fine and great but completely irrelevant to this discussion, about editing this Wikipedia page. This isn't an F1 forum and we aren't here to discuss that. Alyo (chat·edits) 15:40, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Cool, so make a list based solely on your unique and personal opinion that GOAT is just whoever has better numbers and everyone who understands those sports will laugh and ignore the list. Go ahead and do it.2804:F04:903F:AF00:508:EE79:7219:73CD (talk) 15:42, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

This page isn't doing that. It's name makes it obvious it's meant to reflect "sports figures considered the greatest". Key word: considered; that consideration is from the sourcing. Discussions on this talk page should be about what sourcing exactly is fine to use. Not 100% sure because the IP address is different, but making an educated guess that you're the one who commented earlier: "it comes very close to the reality I imagine it to be". Not sure how you can say that and then try to tell someone else "make a list based solely on your unique and personal opinion". And again, that latter comment is inaccurate. Soulbust (talk) 19:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

where is Nadal & Rod Laver in the men's GOAT list ? Laver was considered the GOAT male tennis player of 20th century & Nadal considered the GOAT on clay & his name mentioned many times as GOAT alongside Federer & Djokovic. 2409:4060:2D30:F318:0:0:AF08:1602 (talk) 04:57, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Being "considered the GOAT on clay" or "of [the] 20th century" are qualifiers, and obviously (hopefully to you), different from being the greatest tennis player of all time.

I think other editors would likely be opposed to listing Nadal as the greatest on clay (or Laver of the 20th century), but even if they weren't, those qualifiers would need to be specified in the respective list entries. If you can find reliable sourcing on Nadal's name being "mentioned many times as GOAT", feel free to add it. Soulbust (talk) 09:19, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Nadal is part of a group called "Big 3" and sometimes "Big 4" and that is due to all of the players on this group are considered GOATs, sure he is also called "king of clay", but that does not mean he should be left out of the GOAT list Haddad Maia fan (talk) 13:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Its absolutely laughable to consider Margaret Court as the GOAT. Nobody considered her GOAT or even among top 3. She is often mentioned as the player with most slams & often got criticized by winning cheap Australian open in 60's. The three names that mentioned as undisputed female tennis GOAT are Serena, Steffi Graf & Navratilova.So please guys reasearch more before put those names in wiki pages. 2409:4060:2D30:F318:0:0:AF08:1602 (talk) 05:00, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

"Nobody considered her GOAT or even among top 3" is kinda funny when the entry's source is right there. Source by the way says "Crowned by experts the best player in the history of tennis, Court collected 24 Grand Slam titles over her career—the most of any player". Serena is already sourced. If you can find reliable sourcing that calls Graf or Navratilova the GOAT of women's tennis, feel free to add it. Soulbust (talk) 09:15, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

It absolutely bogus list. The list is solely judge by total number of grand slam nor by greatness.In 99 % of the the GOAT list (e.g by tennis channel, tennis magazine, associated press, ESPN) Graf & Navratilova were ranked higher than Court. Associated press in 1999 ranked Graf as the GOAT tennis player of 20th century ahead of Martina while Court was ranked just 4th. In 2012 tennis channel ranked Graf as the GOAT female tennis player ahead of Martina. In 2020 tennis channel ranked Serena 1st then Martina then Steffi while Court was ranked as 6th. So reasearch properly then argue. 2409:4060:2D30:F318:0:0:AF08:1602 (talk) 11:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

This is a collaborative project, If you have reliable sources that say some other player is the GOAT, feel free to add on the list with that source Haddad Maia fan (talk) 13:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Lol GQ compile that list based on total slam won. Literally nobody today argue than Court is greater than Serena. No way a Roy Emerson is greater than Borg & Laver. It's sad that you have trusted that bogus GQ list where they measured greatness by slam only. Now check 100 greatest tennis players list by tennis channel, tennis abstract 128 greatest players list, tennis magazine 25 greatest female players of last 50 years. In every those list Navratilova & Graf ahead of Court. Could you show me any other resources where Court have been called GOAT?? No she was never called the GOAT (may be in some Australian magazine but not universally). 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 22:33, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Reliable source?? Check wiki page of the topic 'tennis'. In women's tennis section they written that "the female tennis player frequently mention in WTA GOAT debate are Steffi, Martina & Serena." 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 03:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

First, nothing on Wikipedia can be written without a reliable source that backs it up, second Wikipedia itself can't be the source Haddad Maia fan (talk) 04:29, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

So what is reliable source ?? That bogus GQ magazine lol. What about tennis channel, tennis magazine or ESPN list ?? 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 04:35, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

It has been in the F1 section that this list should not be stat based, but that is exactly what the GQ article is doing, listing tennis players in order of wins. It should not be used as source for tennis 'greats'. ~2026-29252-6 (talk) 17:30, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Where is Garry Kasporav?? In terms of dominance, titles, impact, longevity, popularity etc, it's hard to say anybody other is Kasporav is the GOAT of chess. Carslen haven't reached that level. BTW players like Karpov & Bobby Fischer also deserve special mention. Despite lack of longevity there is still some expert believes Fischer at his peak is the best ever. I think Wikipedia should employee some knowledgeable expert from each sports to decide who is GOAT or GOAT contender rather than a random guys put that GOAT list without any basic knowledge. And why give so important to NFL. NFL is not a global sports it's mainly famous & played in USA. None of their athlete are universally recognised GOAT. Atleast 90% of this list are from USA. 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 00:48, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

This is not a forum to complain that someone is not on the list. If you believe someone should be there, just add the name with a reliable source that backs it up. There is absolutely no need to do what you are doing Haddad Maia fan (talk) 01:08, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

And about your question on the NFL, just look at the article's name and you will understand that it refers to all sports in existence, being or not being globally relevant or defused, so it would be very wrong not to include NFL here Haddad Maia fan (talk) 01:12, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Reliable sources?? Are you crazy ?? Everybody in chess know that Kasporav is the GOAT. Yeah Carslen is also talked about as GOAT but a sports have multiple GOAT. For example you including Magic Johnson as one of GOAT in NBA but if you watched ESPN debate Magic hardly made in to top 3. The top 3 NBA goat's are MJ, LeBron & Kareem. So you are judge by one reliable source & neglect 100 of it. 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 03:20, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Again, you misunderstood on how Wikipedia works, first you don't need to get mad about the absence of the name you think is suitable for the list because you have the power to add it yourself, secondly "general knowledge", "general consensus" or similar things are not justifiable arguments for including something on a Wikipedia article, per rule you ALWAYS NEED A RELIABLE SOURCE, such as a book, magazine, website, newspaper, ETC, otherwise your edition will be deleted, thats the way it is Haddad Maia fan (talk) 04:33, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Listen man Iam watching tennis since 80's & follow other sports. I never heard any commenters or pundits ranked Margaret Court as the GOAT of women's tennis. The names mostly heard are Navratilova & Graf until Serena comes (of course Serena the GOAT was hyped by USA media that already began by Jon Werthiem on sports illustrated cover in 2010 for which he faced many backlash but since then Serena won extra 10 slams to increase her tally to 23) sometimes I heard the name Connolly, Lenglen, Helen Wills in GOAT debate but I never heard any tennis fans & expert said Court is the GOAT. Yeah she is mentioned as the player with most slams. Virtually all past legends & expert criticize her by winning those cheap A.O & normal tennis fans hardly knows her. 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 04:45, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia is not based or constructed on personal opinion of the editors or plain personal experience of them. Editors ALWAYS need a reliable source, if you can't find one, then you should not write anything until you do find that source. Secondly, simply "following" a topic or subject for doesn't matter how much time is not a permission to write something on Wikipedia without a source to back it up

Haddad Maia fan (talk) 05:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

now search on the topic of greatest female tennis player of all time. Let's see in how many in those list Margaret Court is come at top 2. The three will be Serena, Graf & Navratilova in any other in 99% of the list. So either you are lazy nor you are doing any reasearch. 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 05:33, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

nope, fans & pundits opinion matters. If your name didn't mention by any fans & tennis pundits as the best ever then he/she never deserved to be the GOAT despite winning a ton of titles. 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:0:0:AFC8:3209 (talk) 05:37, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

A simple "opinion" can matter somewhere, but not here on Wikipedia, why is so hard for you to understand that there is always the need of a reliable source and that you just do not have to write huge amounts of text on the talk page been mad for each name you are unsatisfied that it is not included, if you can resolve that issue yourself? Haddad Maia fan (talk) 10:58, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

"NFL is not a global sports it's mainly famous & played in USA. None of their athlete are universally recognised GOAT. At least 90% of this list are from USA. ". Exactly. The lists presented are dominated by American sports and American sportspeople. Like NFL and a little less so Baseball, these games are not widely played at the professional level worldwide at the level say in Japan or the United States. People are not interested. Cricket is a huge international sport and the scoring averages for Don Bradman have him standing out as easily the best sportsperson, yet Michael Jordan who plays basketball - a second or third-tier sport in most countries outside the United States - is ranked Number One. When it comes to listing sportspeople, his name does not quickly come to mind. Also, NFL – Gridiron - is ranked, it seems, above soccer football as a sport! Why? Soccer football - the most popular football in the world - is a vastly more successful international sport. The likes of Pele are well known. I remember from my travels the name "Montana" in the United States as a great quarterback in NFL. That is the limit of the impression of U.S. sports on the world outside North America. In tennis, Serena Williams is ranked Number One when Margaret Court still holds the record for the number of major cups won. At the Sydney Olympics, Phelps could not catch Thorpe. So, I think this assessment is strongly biased towards an American preference. I think it has been established the Number One Sportsperson in the world is Don Bradman with a record that has stood going on a century. ~2025-43156-28 (talk) 08:59, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

This list is source-driven, not editor-opinion–driven. Inclusion reflects whether reliable, independent sources have explicitly described an athlete as the singular "greatest," "GOAT," or equivalent. The list does not claim that one athlete or sport is inherently superior to another. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 09:20, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

First, American Football or just Football is the name of the sport, NFL is the national United States professional league for that sport, second Cricket is played by a vast number of players in a fewest number of countries, but is not worldwide spread, third, this list is not to compare one athlete to another or to say an sport ir more popular than other sports. If you think some athlete could be included on the list what you have to do is just find reliable sources that say this athlete is the GOAT and then you put it on the article, simple as that Haddad Maia fan (talk) 12:43, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Some people are using this talk page to complain about some name or some names not being included on the list and that is just not the purpose of this talk page. Note that if you think some name is suitable to be included, just add It there with a reliable source that backs it up, as simple as that. There's absolutely no need to write an enormous text complaining about the absence of some name Haddad Maia fan (talk) 01:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Ohtani as Goat?? No baseball fans & expert ranked him as the GOAT yet. People says he is the greatest talent ever in baseball. Surprised to see Barry Bonds & Hank Aaron omissions. 2409:4060:2E92:EF56:AD39:C152:98:45A6 (talk) 03:48, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Adding Rafael Nadal to the list of the greatest tennis players of all time (men) - nothing could be more natural. After his incredible achievements on clay, and in general, he has won more Grand Slam tournaments than another name on the list - Roger Federer. It should be noted that opinions differ as to who is the greatest player of all, and there is no doubt that Nadal is on this list.

Please see this suggested edit:

2A0D:6FC2:5A60:B300:E1BF:FCE8:A46C:FB1C (talk) 18:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Not adding Nadal would make this article to be in conflict with this other article, the Big Three (tennis), that literally says this on its first phrase:

"The Big Three is a common nickname in tennis for the trio of Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer, each considered to be among the greatest tennis players of all time."

We don't want to have articles that have conflicting information, isn't that right? Haddad Maia fan (talk) 19:47, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

While the two sources are legit, the above Widespread views discussion may ultimately mean that just two sources will not suffice to have Nadal included (this can apply to many names on the list, I just have not gotten around to truly assessing where each athlete stands right now).

That aside (I think it is fine to have Nadal included at the moment), it should be noted that, and emphatically, no -- the Big Three (tennis) article's line that each considered to be among the greatest tennis players of all time would not be in conflict with this list if this list were to leave Nadal (or either of the other two off). The key word in that article's line is "among". I cannot stress enough that this list is aiming to list athletes that are reliably sourced as the, singular, greatest of all time. Not among the greatest. Not one of the greatest. But the greatest. These two sources for Nadal, luckily do that:

• for ESPN, they already mention tennis legend Maria Sharapova as calling Nadal the GOAT, but the source's headline itself affirms the opinion "he's the GOAT". The prose of the ESPN article itself is just shy of an unequivocal, explicit sign-off on that opinion but those closing sentences: "Nadal also has been successful enough on the other surfaces that he has a strong case as the best tennis player of all time. His success at majors outside of the French Open compares very favorably with anyone in the Open era -- including Federer. Nadal is the unquestioned King of Clay, but taken as a whole, he is very likely the King of tennis as a whole. Long live the King." are worded in such a way that I would lean toward supporting this as an acceptable source for Nadal.
• The Diario Sur source, definitely biased as a local/regional Spanish source, but unless alerted otherwise, I have no reason to believe it is unreliable. It's much more explicit in its prose: "The Spaniard's tally leaves little doubt that he is the greatest tennis player of all time".

So yes, these sources are good to go here. But please keep in mind, pending what ends up happening over time given that Widespread views discussion, Nadal would most likely need more sourcing for inclusion. Soulbust (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

Fine, here are more sources:

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/10901358/andre-agassi-said-rafael-nadal-greatest-tennis-player-ever-not-roger-federer

https://www.si.com/si-wire/2014/05/08/andre-agassi-rafael-nadal-greatest-tennis-player-ever

https://www.tntsports.co.uk/tennis/rafael-nadal-maybe-the-most-important-tennis-player-of-all-time-says-mats-wilander-after-australian-_sto9951949/story.shtml Haddad Maia fan (talk) 21:08, 3 July 2025 (UTC)

I mean that looks like 3 new sources, but it's really just 1. The ESPN and SI sources just cite the same instance of the same person calling Nadal the GOAT (Agassi in 2014). The TNT Sports source cites Mats Wilander calling Nadal maybe the most "important" tennis player, but that's an obviously different thing than greatest. So that wouldn't apply here. Soulbust (talk) 07:18, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

@No Swan So Fine: Your addition of the tennis entries is definitely one I recognize as one made in good faith. But, this list is only citing sources that refer to an athlete as the single greatest of their sport (not as one of); please see the "Widespread views" discussion above and the "Panels" discussion over at Talk:GOAT (sports culture). I can't examine the Tennis magazine source you included because it is only accessible with an EBSCO account. But surely, logically speaking, it can't list all 20 players on its "20 Greatest of the 20th Century" lists as the greatest. Since you have access to the source, I'm asking you to adjust for this and list only whoever it ranks/lists at #1. If it is ambiguous, then unfortunately I don't think this would be a usable source here. Soulbust (talk) 04:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you - I've been a big fan of your ceaseless work on internet culture and your witty DYKs for a while. Your GOAT article was fabulous. I include below the rationale from the editors of Tennis ... and their belief that "there are players who've left such an indelible imprint on our sport that their greatness endures, and they stand in relief from all the others", which I believe justifies their inclusion.

THERE HAVE BEEN ANY NUMBER OF GREAT tennis players in the 20th century, but just who are the best of the best? Is it even possible to comb through 10 decades of tennis history and pick an elite group of 20?

There are many who regard such an undertaking as pure foolishness, a conceit born of a neurotic need to categorize, to compare apples and oranges. And they have a point.

To measure the relative greatness of, say, Bill Tilden and Pete Sampras--without question the dominant players of their generations--is pointless, because while both men hit a round ball with a flat racquet, they didn't remotely play the same game. For surely what passes for tennis today no more resembles the sport Tilden towered over in the 1920s than a 1999 Ford Taurus resembles a Model-T.

Although it's no doubt true that when something is gained, something else is lost (in tennis, this usually means artistry losing out to power), what's also true is that, mano a mano, it's highly unlikely that Tilden could beat any top player on today's ATP tour, much less Sampras. And why would anyone think he could? Today's players ply frames so powerful they're almost dangerous, and any twitches in their strokes can be tweaked by coaches with advanced degrees in biomechanics. (And unlike Tilden, most know better than to down a couple of huge steaks with hash browns just before a match.)

Yet despite the futility of trying to draw parallel lines across an imaginary plane of time, there are players who've left such an indelible imprint on our sport that their greatness endures, and they stand in relief from all the others.

And no two are alike. Some were geniuses on court, bearing such idiosyncratic gifts that to have seen one is to have seen the last of its kind. Others achieved their singular places in history precisely because they spawned a generation of reasonable facsimiles, having pushed the sport in a new and seemingly inevitable direction. Some of the greatest had all the shots and knew exactly when to use them, while others are legends because they discovered ways to win matches when those with more obvious talents were found lacking. Some fed off their emotions, while others used iron wills to create paths of most resistance. Some players burned white-hot and then burned out, while others performed at the top of their game year after year after year. The fact that the greatest players cut their own individual paths to immortality is precisely why they defy, but also provoke, comparisons.

We're sure to receive letters blasting our choices, excoriating us for not recognizing such champions as Pancho Gonzalez and Evonne Goolagong and Andre Agassi and (insert your favorite here). But, one hopes, there is some safety in numbers: The players we pay tribute to in these pages were chosen by a panel of 108 sportswriters and editors; like you, each has his or her own personal list of all-time greats. What surprised--but also edified--us was that at the end of the day, the results of the poll were virtually identical to the list that our editorial staff produced on its own. Which leads us to believe that dabbling in such a creative art as judging the greats may not be so frivolous after all.

No Swan So Fine (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

below this, it reads:

THE "GREATS" DEBATE

WHEN IT COMES TO PICKING THE CENTURY'S TOP TENNIS PLAYERS, TENNIS WRITERS AND fans don't always see eye to eye. That became apparent after analyzing the results of an online readers poll we conducted in September.

The criteria given to readers were the same for our writers (choices were to be based solely on talent and on-court accomplishments), but the similarities ended there. Readers showed a stronger taste for the contemporary: Andre Agassi, fresh off his 1999 French and U.S. Open victories, finished second in the men's voting, right behind Pete Sampras and ahead of Rod Laver. Yet Agassi didn't make the writers' Top 10 list. In addition, Ivan Lendl (No. 6), Arthur Ashe (No. 8), and Boris Becker (No. 9)--none of whom made the writers' Top 10--all were on the fans' list, while Bill Tilden, tennis' legendary player of the 1920s, wasn't.

There was less of a discrepancy on the women's side, where eight players made both Top 10 lists. The two exceptions: Readers included Tracy Austin and Margaret Osborne DuPont and left off Maureen Connolly (No. 11), the first woman to win the Grand Slam, and Althea Gibson (No. 12), the first African-American to win Wimbledon and the U.S. Championships. Recently retired Steffi Graf and Monica Seles were the readers' top vote-getters.

Women

1. STEFFI GRAF

2. MONICA SELES

3. MARTINA NAVRATILOVA

4. HELEN WILLS MOODY

5. BILLIE JEAN KING

6. CHRIS EVERT

7. MARGARET COURT

8. SUZANNE LENGLEN TRACY AUSTIN

10. MARGARET OSBORNE DUPONT

Men

1. PETE SAMPRAS

2. ANDRE GASSI

3. ROD LAVER

4. BJORN BORG

5. JOHN MCENROE

6. IVAN LENDL

7. ROY EMERSON

8. ARTHU ASHE

9. BORIS BECKER

10. JIMMY CONNORS

I have removed the source for all but Graf and Sampras as it seems clear they are the ones considered "the greatest" by this article. Toffeenix (talk) 11:18, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

@No Swan So Fine: Thank you for the kind words. Also apologies for the much delayed response; I have been very busy offline and have been slow to do things I've been meaning to on here. I unfortunately mostly agree with Toffeenix's decision to only keep that source for Graf and Sampras but I do appreciate you bringing attention to the source. I think it would be valuable over on the main GOAT article. Best wishes, Soulbust (talk) 03:14, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

@Toffeenix: @Soulbust: The article makes it clear that the top 10 was the view of members of the public, not experts. The experts, of course, couldn't choose a single figure. Are public polls sufficient criteria for this 'GOAT' discussion? No Swan So Fine (talk) 20:42, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

I think being ranked #1 in a public poll is probably fair enough for inclusion (in the understanding that these were ranked top 10s). I think being ranked "one of the top 10" is probably not enough. But we would probably need to standardise the rest of the article one way or another because there are a million billion gridiron players for whatever reason and that doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense Toffeenix (talk) 02:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

@Toffeenix the gridiron players are all ranked #1 at their respective position by a given source. The specific panel sourcing those players make it clear how many #1/first-place votes a player received, whereas most other panels I included as sources simply aggregate their panel voting, presenting it in a ranked list, and don't make it clear how many panelists selected a player as #1. This is the reason why there are an abundance of football players listed. This is an issue/consideration I ran into before and defintiely would appreciate any further thoughts from other editors to help build a clearer consensus on how to approach it... in the above Widespread views section, my relevant comment is the "Also on that note, how would you (or how should we) evaluate a source like ESPN's 50-expert panel regarding every NFL position GOAT? Would Joe Montana receiving 4/50 votes count as 4 toward his entry as greatest QB, or does this source in its entirety count as only 1 for Tom Brady (44/50 of the panel's votes)..." comment. Soulbust (talk) 03:31, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

fully scrapping the rugby by position section. there is one cited source and I do not see how it is important or relevant. to be honest I think this entire article could be shelved. what a mess. Toffeenix (talk) 10:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

How come you didn't mention Helen Wills name but there is BJK & Marble. Both are nowhere near as great as Helen Wills who win 19 slams despite skipping A.O. 2409:4060:389:1EE4:0:0:1096:18A1 (talk) 09:44, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

As I said before, the talk page is not a place for complaining that an athlete is not included on the list, that is not what it is about. If you have a good reliable source, you can add yourself with no need to come here and complain Haddad Maia fan (talk) 12:20, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

In fact, that is how the whole Wikipedia works, you can add anything on to an article as long as you provide one or more reliable sources for that Haddad Maia fan (talk) 12:25, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Needs to be something like greatest sports people in America. This is the least accurate page I've seen on Wikipedia because it's so American dominated 2A02:6B6F:F147:C000:4F48:B1EE:8AB4:1C26 (talk) 10:29, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

There are plenty of international athletes listed in this article, but if you have any suggestions for additional international athletes, I’m all ears. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

This was from before when there was almost no international athletes, now it is better Haddad Maia fan (talk) 23:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I was wondering if you think it'd be appropriate to add Jesse Owens to the track and field section of this article as he was named the greatest track and field athlete of the first half of the century by the Associated Press in 1950. See the following link confirming: https://www.nyshistoricnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=paa19510426-01.1.22&e=-------en-20--1--txt-txIN---------- GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

In the General table at the top of the article, Jordan, Ali, Thorpe, Phelps and Bolt all appear in the 'all sports' category but also appear in others in the same table for century and Olympic games categories. It seems obvious if they could be considered the greatest in general they would obviously be considered the greatest in a smaller category that they participate in. @GOAT_Bones231012 Should they be removed? DiamondIIIXX (talk) 21:54, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Not a bad point. I kind of didn’t like seeing double names or in the case of Phelps, three of the same name on the table. I’ll start removing duplicates. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 22:45, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

The selection of sources in this article seems indiscriminate with regard to even WP:RS, let alone WP:BLP and the concerns raised in above.

This article needs very strong sourcing. Poor and unreliable sources should not be even considered per WP:BLP.

Best to have clear inclusion criteria as well offering guidance on what references are worth considering and how to select entries. --Hipal (talk) 20:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@Hipal I see your point regarding strong sourcing. The sourcing for some of the athletes are kind of weak. So do you think only sources that have a Wikipedia article (or if their parent company has a wiki article) should be included in this article? Meaning delete all the non-highlighted sources? What about sources where specific athletes or analysts call someone the "greatest of all time"? Should those be deleted as well?

As for inclusion criteria for this page, would I just start a new section here on the talk page outlining that? What about a minimum amount of sources for an athlete to be added to a list. Should that be discussed as well?

Sorry for all the questions, just want to be clear on how I should go about doing this. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

There are many good suggestions in the "Widespread views" discussion. Wikiproject Lists and Wikiproject Sports should also be helpful. --Hipal (talk) 21:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Hey @Left guide, do all sources where specific athletes or analysts say that an athlete is the "greatest of all time" need to be deleted? And do you think all non-highlighted sources should be deleted as well? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 21:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

The selection of sources still appears indiscriminate. --Hipal (talk) 17:49, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

How is that indiscriminate when it’s a source specifically ranking the greatest female soccer players of all time, which is exactly what this article is about? You’ve also wrote in your edit summary for removing it that it was unreliable source. In what way? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 17:59, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Also, Bagumba agrees "the more sources the merrier" so why would there be an excessive citations tag? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 18:04, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

See the first comment in this discussion. Repeatedly adding clearly unreliable sources to this article is inappropriate. --Hipal (talk) 19:26, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Still haven’t answered how the source you removed was unreliable other than saying it is unreliable. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:56, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I covered the general problem for you back in July: User_talk:GOAT_Bones231012#TheFamousPeople_as_a_source --Hipal (talk) 20:01, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Still don’t see why this specific source was removed by you earlier as unreliable. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_210#therichest.com. --Hipal (talk) 22:15, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I've requested help at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#List_of_sports_figures_considered_the_greatest. --Hipal (talk) 00:47, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

ESPN in 2016 invites 40 panelists & they voted Steffi as the GOAT in women's tennis. Overall just second behind Federer. Tennis abstract lists their 128 greatest players list in 2022 & Steffi comes first among women & overall second behind Rod Laver. ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 23:14, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Seems fair enough as she is the highest ranked woman in both rankings. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 00:23, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Do you have the list of 20 greatest tennis player of 20th century by 108 expert by tennis magazine ?? ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 09:12, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Bleacher report in 2011 also ranked Steffi Graf as the greatest female tennis player in open era in their 25 greatest player list. ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 09:58, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Greatest players of the century is different than greatest of all time. Similarly, greatest player of the open era would mean that athletes from a previous era are left out, so probably shouldn’t add. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 14:52, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Oh! That's right. Now there is two articles in 2017 titled (both are same by same writer) " Why Federer & Graf are still ahead of Serena " & "Serena vs Federer GOAT debate is bogus" by Chris Beck in which he clearly mentioned that Graf is the GOAT. ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 01:47, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

It would be great if you could start providing the links, but anyways, a single individual like a writer, analyst, commentator, or regular joe shmo posting/saying that someone is the GOAT shouldn’t be added. We’re looking to add rankings, panels of experts selecting, or reliable sources making mention of them specifically being "widely considered/regarded as the greatest of all time" GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 04:03, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Yeah that article was discussed in Grand slam magazine in March 2017 article. BTW you guys have added so many GOAT article written by one expert or journalist (without any specific ranking) to many athlete's link. So why this not ?? ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 04:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Can you please specify which ones? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 13:35, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

What about article number 580,582,583,584, 587 for Serena Williams ?? Those article hardly had any GOAT ranking & just written by one expert or writer of USA biased media to declare her as the GOAT. So you are talking about one expert opinion doesn't matter but you have added so many of those. Is there biased towards USA athlete going on ?? ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 20:52, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I'm not intending to start discourse, I'm merely curious as to why this list was felt necessary as a Wikipedia article. PunkAndromeda (talk) 06:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I’m curious what makes you so curious. Just kidding, that was a Django Unchained line I couldn’t resist. There are similar lists on wiki, but consolidates widespread coverage from reliable sources that is otherwise scattered across many individual biographies and helps readers navigate a major area of sports discourse that is heavily covered by reliable outlets. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 13:44, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

I understand that, but looking at the page history, it originally was part of the GOAT (sports culture) page, no? It appears to me that the list on that article addresses the topic quite well.

My concern is that this page is currently, as it stands, so long and bloated that it becomes unnavigable for readers. In an attempt to consolidate this widespread coverage, its created a situation where the page almost needs to be too detailed for readability in order to be accurate. Especially with references; generally Wikipedia recommends no more than 3-4 citations per fact on a page, yet as it stands (without even being a complete article) there are over 1,420 references total, and most individuals have between 5 and 10.

For this page's intent to be proven, there it needs to be heavily referenced. But Wikipedia's own guidelines suggest that, if an article needs such heavy referencing, it may not otherwise be a notable subject. It's sort of a Catch-22: in order to prove the point, it needs a lot of references, but this amount of references goes directly against the notability concepts Wikipedia tends to follow. PunkAndromeda (talk) 07:35, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Chase Your Sports site in 2020 ranked 5 greatest female tennis player of all time & ranked Graf as #1 with Serena #2, Martina #3, Court #4 & Evert #5. ~2025-31521-81 (talk) 22:55, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Why is so much space given to American football given that it is not in the top 10 most played or viewed sports? Wikipediun2000 (talk) 16:07, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Being in the top 10 most played or watched sports is obviously not a requirement for inclusion on this list. 20 other sports would be removed as well if that were the case. And anyways… guess which sport is #10 on the most watched sports list GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 16:38, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi - I was not referring to inclusion but the prominence. The list that GOAT Bones231012 refers to is the only one I have seen that includes American football in the top 10 most viewed sports, but it's with noting that it does not include any sources. Wikipediun2000 (talk) 11:03, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

This is a list about greatest of all time athletes or players from all sports, so of course it has to include American Football Haddad Maia fan (talk) 11:30, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I was not referring to its inclusion, but the prominence given. Wikipediun2000 (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Prominence in what way exactly? Just FYI, I don’t if you’ve noticed that the sports are listed in alphabetical order if that is what you are possibly referring to. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

For example, under the section "List of team sports athletes considered the greatest by position"

There are four sports listed, American Football, association football, baseball, basketball and "other sports "

In the American football section there are 9 photos of American footballers and a list of approx 50.

In the association football section there are 2 photos of footballers and a list of approx 25.

In the baseball, and basketball all sections another 6 photos and lists of around 30 players.

There are no sections for cricket, rugby union, rugby league, volleyball, women's football etc.

Under "Other sports" there is one photo of a cricketer and just two Cricketers in the list- a sport that is much larger than American football both in viewers and players.

Wikipediun2000 (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I understand now. Any user can edit the article page, there are no restrictions (I think). So if you see a sport missing that you’d like added with players considered the greatest by position, then by all means. Just make sure you add several reliable sources to back it up for each player in any given sport like it’s been done for others. As for the pictures, are you proposing a limit to the amount of photos based on the amount of players listed? Or something else? GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Would the inclusion of flag icons be appropriate? See the example below:

More information Sport, Player ...

List of athletes considered the greatest

Sport	Player	Sources
All sports	Muhammad Ali
	Simone Biles
	Usain Bolt
	Tom Brady
	Roger Federer
	Wayne Gretzky
	Bo Jackson
	Michael Jordan
	Lionel Messi
	Michael Phelps
	Jim Thorpe
	Serena Williams

Close

There would have to be rules established for which flags to be used in certain cases, such as if the athlete in question has multiple nationalities (e.g. Marta), competed during a time in which the a since-replaced flag was used (e.g. Jesse Owens), or represented a country that doesn't exist anymore (e.g. Lev Yashin). Rockfighterz M (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

With over a day passed, I've gone ahead and added flags for all athletes. I used historical flags if the athlete in question ended their top-level/elite career before the adoption of the new flag. I deemed most countries and variants used uncontroversial, but a few could be up for discussion, most notably those for the athletes:

• Whose careers ended just after the adoption of a new flag, and had thus spent the vast majority of their careers representing the former flag (e.g. Ted Williams)
• Whose careers didn't have a clear end, but rather phased out into lower tiers at the same time as a flag change (e.g. Pelé)
• With multiple nationalities, for most of whom the country they represented at international level was used – the problem arose when the given athlete never competed internationally (e.g. Albert Pujols)
• From France who ended their careers before 2020, for whom the darker variant of the French flag was used much like other articles featuring this template (e.g. Zinedine Zidane)
• From Puerto Rico, for whom the American flag was used (Edgar Martínez)

Of course, there may be plain mistakes of mine as well. If so, please correct them! Rockfighterz M (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Rockfighterz M, I'm sorry, I'm just seeing this discussion now, but I have to disagree with the use of flags. See the policy at MOS:SPORTFLAG: basically we only use flags when the athlete is representing that country, not just to show their nationality. Let me know if you can remove the flags, or I'll do it later this week. Alyo (chat·edits) 16:03, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

I was unfamiliar with that part of the MOS, so thanks for pointing it out. Couldn't it be reasoned, though, that many of these athletes did represent their country in international competitions (such as the Olympics), the use of flags thus being justified? Rockfighterz M (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

You could certainly argue that, but I would ask a couple questions: (1) What does including the flag add in the context of the article? This is about individual athletes being considered the greatest regardless of nationality, not what countries produce the greatest athletes, or what Olympic delegation was cumulatively greatest. (I would agree with including the flag for that last one.) (2) How many of those really are there? Keeping in mind that just because, say, Lebron has competed at the Olympics, he's obviously not in this list because of his Olympic representation, I think that it's a very small number that your suggestion would apply to. So I think it would actually cause more issues if 90% of the athletes didn't have flags (basically none of the team sports) but then Johannes Høsflot Klæbo did. Alyo (chat·edits) 17:05, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Nuanced, I know, as he didnt compete. But it is generally undeniable that he was a GOAT athlete. ~2026-99533-4 (talk) 05:25, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Did you ever heard about Paavo Nurmi??? ~2026-15568-44 (talk) 01:20, 12 March 2026 (UTC)

Toni Bou won every world championship since 2007. No discussion he is the GOAT of trial. ~2026-16539-14 (talk) 03:34, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

I propose a split of this article into the following:

• List of sports figures considered the greatest (~244 kB)
• List of sports players considered the greatest (~315 kB)

If there are no major objections, I will perform this split around late June. zsteve21 (talk) 15:35, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Uhh, objection here, what's the reason for the split? What is a "figure"? Is that just "personnel" + "media figures"? Alyo (chat·edits) 16:29, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok, I looked deeper into the article, and it seems that the actual problem is the excess notes and references. That means the split won't be necessary, but the question now is how to reduce this excess? zsteve21 (talk) 18:17, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm on record that the "by position" portion of this article is a little more tenuous. There comes a point where we are finding too many specific ways in order to define more people as GOATs. Three defensive midfielders, one of whom is almost entirely sourced to blogs? I very much disagree with that inclusion. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:09, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

The references and notes are excessive, the list is very US-centric and the quality of the sourcing is poor. The article needs to be cut down severely and rewritten neutrally. Chess, speedcubing, esports are not sports and shouldn't be included. Same goes with including horses for horse racing. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Sourcing needs to be checked for sure, but "Chess, speedcubing, esports are not sports" is a pretty contentious thing to say. I definitely would argue they should be included. The horses for horse racing is also something I would again argue to include.

I do think the positional portion Alyo mentioned can be trimmed, and if there's any split it should be like splitting off the major sports that have long-documented/argued GOAT conversations, debates, etc. Then "by position" can be included in those sub-pages, but I feel like that sort of concept would be long down the line, as cleaning up this list is a much more immediate need. Soulbust (talk) 16:00, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Is this page about "human" individuals considered the greatest on sports or individuals in general, which includes none humans as well? Haddad Maia fan (talk) 12:26, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

To the extent that horse racing is generally categorized as a "sport" (see "The Greatest Two Minutes in Sports"), I would continue to include jockeys/horses if they meet other standards for inclusion. I don't know what other non-humans you might be thinking of. Referees? ha   ha   ha. Alyo (chat·edits) 19:07, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

I can only think of Greyhound racing, but I know that there are many more… Read the article Animals in sport to see more examples.

I also thought of Robot combat that is generally considered to be a sport as well Haddad Maia fan (talk) 19:24, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

I think I would be surprised if the sourcing for robot combat meets our standards for inclusion. But I'm willing to be surprised. Alyo (chat·edits) 19:35, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

If it's okay, can I go ahead and remove all blog sources for now? zsteve21 (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

To add to this, some people in the ball and hockey sports section have over 20+ citations. zsteve21 (talk) 12:23, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

@Zsteve21 I'm certainly in favor of you're moving blogs. Could you do that, and just that, in one single edit so it's easy to see what you've done after? Alyo (chat·edits) 19:20, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, in fact, I have already done that. Are there any other types of sources that may be unreliable? zsteve21 (talk) 22:31, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Surprised to see that some people are still using this talk page to complain about athlete A or B not being included on the article's list as if there is only one person or a group of restricted individuals that could edit the page and include another athlete's name. Everyone can add a new name if they have a good and reliable source to back it up.

There is absolutely no need to state that you are unhappy that a name is not on the list, instead, you could use your time and energy to put the name there with the sources. It is simple as that Haddad Maia fan (talk) 16:12, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

So, I want to add Jefinho (Paralympic footballer) as the GOAT of Blind football, but all sources I could find say that he is the "Pelé of blind football", could I use those sources? Haddad Maia fan (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Having a quick glance it seems about 65% of the page is Notes or References. The sheer amount of references is causing timeout errors from reference 1213 (at least when I view the page), with the error "The time allocated for running scripts has expired." showing until the end at reference 1519. This is clearly too many to keep the page readable. I propose limiting the number of references for each entry to 5 (choosing the highest quality sources), and removing the "Notes" formatting with the "Sources or lists that share such an opinion include:" and bulleted lists, in favour of bare references.

Messi's entry for Association football (men's) has forty-two references! Way too many. And the quality of references across the entire article is poor, and needs a lot of culling as part of removing the unnecessary ones. DiamondIIIXX (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

@DiamondIIIXX Strongly agree. I suggest we do something like the consensus at List of video games listed among the best, where is entrant is considered once it has appeared in six different publications. At the same time, we should raise the bar on sourcing (or at least better enforce existing standards). To your point about Messi, if a player has more than ~5 strong sources we should put a cap on how many were included. We may also need to have a discussion about article splits and pushing some non-traditional sports out, or to their own articles. However, that may also be mooted by just removing bad sources. For example, most of the esports section gets completely removed if we remove junk/middling sources. Alyo (chat·edits) 18:10, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Proposal to include Amandinha (Women's Futsal) == I would like to propose the inclusion of the Brazilian professional futsal player Amandinha (Amanda Lyssa de Oliveira Crisóstomo) to the list, specifically under the indoor sports category. Amandinha satisfies the stringent criteria of overwhelming global consensus and unprecedented historic dominance within her sport. Her credentials include: • Unrivaled Peak and Longevity: She was voted the Best Female Futsal Player in the World for 8 consecutive years (2014–2021) by the traditional Futsal Planet Awards . This is a record unmatched by any other athlete—male or female—in the history of futsal. • International Team Success: She has won every major team trophy available, including multiple Copa Libertadores de Futsal Femenino, Copa América titles, and spearheaded the Brazilian National Team to ultimate dominance, including the historic [wikipedia.org FIFA Futsal Women's World Cup]. • Sport-Wide Consensus: Just as Falcão is widely listed and celebrated as the greatest male player of all time, Amandinha holds an identical, undisputed status as the absolute "GOAT" of women's futsal within global sports media. Brunoaaaa111 (talk) 23:01, 7 October 2026 (UTC) Brunoaaaa111 (talk) 00:37, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

@GOAT Bones231012 So first off, thanks for your incredible work with this list. It was badly needed as a whole.

I have an issue with the section on the top that arbitrarily has a list of figures that are somehow considered "greater" than all of the other figures on here for "all sports." First off, almost all of these are repeated from the rest of the article, and second, there is no clear distinction between someone who is the "greatest athlete" and "greatest figure" for one particular sport. It seems like a very unnecessary and judgmental dual-distinction- what makes both Phelps and Ladecky the greatest in their sports, but only Ledecky is among the greatest overall? Why is both Messi and Ronaldo listed as a GOAT for soccer but only Messi is a GOAT for all sports? I know you provided lists of "greatest athletes" as sources but again, I see plenty of exclusions from this list that are present in one or more of the sources.

I am amendable, however, to this list being shortened to just "List of multi-sport athletes considered the greatest." This way, we could keep Bo Jackson, Jim Thorpe, and maybe someone like Deion Sanders who excelled in multiple sports despite not being the greatest at any one individual sport. Thoughts? HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 15:46, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Appreciate the feedback. I think we agreed a while back that for an athlete to be included on a list, they’d need at least 3 reliable sources ranking or describing them as the greatest athlete or sports figure of all time (not "one of"). So if there is anyone missing from the list that meets that criteria, they should probably be included. Granted there is some redundancy with some athletes, but there is a difference between greatest of all time at a specific position, greatest of all time at a specific sport, and greatest of all time regardless of sport. Someone can be considered the greatest swimmer, soccer player, boxer, etc. without necessarily being considered the greatest athlete across all sports.

As for multi-sport athletes, I think they’re pretty well covered at List of multi-sport athletes and List of multi-sport champions. GOAT Bones231012 (talk) 16:52, 12 October 2026 (UTC)