Maps, Directions, and Place Reviews
Should ITF titles and matches be counted?
I am confused by the listing of titles that occurs on the WTA Tour page. It conflates ITF titles with WTA Tour titles for Justing Henin, Conchita Martinez and Kim Clijsters. I understand that this was cited, in a link to a WTA PDF, but in various bios and articles it lists the more standard numbers. I use 'standard' here in the sense that this is the number of titles that is cited by articles, television broadcasts and players and fans alike. Before I crossed the line into Edit War I thought I'd present that question here. --Preceding unsigned comment added by Alonsornunez (talk o contribs) 21:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
How Should I Proceed?
I am new here to Wikipedia, but over the course of the last couple days I have seen any enthusiasm for editing (specifically tennis, a passion of mine) sapped. There seems to be great ownership issues on the part of one user, Tennis Expert, and any changes I make, big or small, have been undone. I am not asking this rhetorically: Where should I edit, where I can expect that any changes will be explored in good faith.
It saddens me that my enthusiasm has been so quickly replaced with disappointment. Alonsornunez (talk) 22:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Request For Comment Re: Serena Slam
I am requesting that any interested party please chime in at Talk: Serena Williams. Edits have been made back and forth over the relevancy of the phrase 'Serena Slam' being included in the article. After having gone back and forth and not moving, I asked for and received a Third Point of View. This editor's suggestion seemed fair, and was integrated, but then edited again. I have been threatened with accusations of Edit Warring and ignoring Wiki policy, despite my honest attempt to be respetful and to engage in conversation to reach a consensus or at least a compromise. I am now opening up the discussion to a larger group to try to establish a consensus, either way. Thanks. Alonsornunez (talk) 04:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. -- Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Quality and length of articles
I've been looking over the tennis articles, and I think that we would all agree that they need some work, especiall to get them to FA status. I've been also looking at the Michael Jordan article (which is FA) and at 87 kilos it clocks in well below a lot of the bloated tennis articles. Any suggestions for how/what to prune? I'd taken out a couple lists and tables which seemed like trivia and a violation of WP:NOT, but they were reinserted. Couple questions then: A) Are these tables/lists to stay in? I think they clog the articles and are trivia; B)Can we work on pulling some of these articles to better status; and C) I'm new, and unsure how to do this! Any general suggestions? Alonsornunez (talk) 04:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
For its relevancy I've posted this here from Wikipedia:Notability: News reports. Wikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events. News coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, but not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own. Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article. Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic. (See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more details.) While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information. Timely news subjects not suitable for Wikipedia may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews.Alonsornunez (talk) 07:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) I tried some time ago to convince people that articles do not need repetitive information. As of now, most articles on top male tennis players has some information stated up to three times. There is a table for all finals, then tables for GS and Masters finals (repetition), and then a "performance timeline" that repeats things further in a different format. But I was reverted either by a now blocked user (who likes Nadal so much that he would probably not mind having stuff repeated 10 times) or by a user who didn't like it because it was against consensus (to my recollection; sorry if I am misrepresenting and lying for the umptieth time). I must admit that I since that have gave up taking this too seriously.--HJensen, talk 18:30, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Suggestions Anyone?
So it seems that Tennis Expert has taken unkindly to my contesting his reversions and my initiative in starting new articles. He's accused me of being a sockpuppet. -sigh- I know that findings will show I am no one but myself. ;-) Is there some where I can file a complaint though, or log some record of this. It seems silly and a tad vindictive. We can't improve tennis articles if new editors are scared away! -sigh- Alonsornunez (talk) 01:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
For a variety of reasons, some Wikipedians also create one or more alternative accounts. An alternative account is an additional username used by a Wikipedian who already has an account. In such cases, the main account is normally assumed to be the one with the longest history and most edits. ... If someone uses alternative accounts, it is recommended that they provide links between the accounts in most cases to make it easy to determine that one individual shares them and to avoid any appearance or suspicion of sockpuppetry (see alternative account notification).
I have an Idea! Hear Me out please!
Why don't we try and cut down on the length of Serena and Venus Williams articles by creating a List of Career Achievements and Awards sections and pages like those for Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus, Roger Federer, and Rafael Nadal! TennisAuthority 03:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Photo Help!
So, I'm getting the hang of this Wikipedia thing. Check out the Williams Sisters rivalry if you get a chance. There's been some great work done over there by editors, and I'm hoping to have it assessed at some point. Along those lines though, I'm clueless has to how to find photos for the article, and more importantly what photos are allowed. If anyone's got a sec and can help explain how that works I'd appreciate it. Alonsornunez (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Article alerts
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Thanks. -- Headbomb {???????????? - WP Physics} 09:45, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)
Premier Mandatory, Premier 5, and Premier tournaments on the WTA tour
Premier Mandatory and Premier 5 are types of Premier tournaments and do not need to be listed especially. They are sub-categories just to distinguish prize money, ranking points, player particpation and if they are compulsory or not. The whole point of the Premier and International categories was to cut down the categories and make the system easier. By putting Mandatory and 5 in the box, it is just making things more complicated, and this means it would just be like the old Tier system with four categories when Premier and International are the main ones. Monokaea (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
This is the 'legend' I've made for Vera Zvonareva. It looks a lot tidier than a long sprawling table like before. I thought I'd post this here for approval before I edit other articles. Boddefan2009 (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Borg-Connors-Lendl-McEnroe Rivalries Page
I am thinking about creating the page with all the match finals these players have played during their careers! What do you all think!TennisAuthority 00:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Poll on date autoformatting and linking
Date autoformatting and linking has been extensively discussed in relation to tennis articles. People may be interested to know that the Poll on date autoformatting and linking is now open. All users are invited to participate. Lightmouse (talk) 11:34, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Templates - help needed
Hi guys, I have been working hard on individual year templates for the ATP Tour (e.g. Template:1990 ATP Tour, Grand Prix tennis circuit (e.g. Template:1985 Nabisco Grand Prix and WCT circuit (e.g. Template:1973 World Championship Tennis circuit as well as some WTA templates. The majority of the links on them should be accurate but I was wondering if someone with tennis knowledge check through the completed templates. Some pre-ATP era tournaments are simply recorded as "[Place name] Open" and I have also been unable to find some of the tournament sponsor names, such as the name of the San Francisco tournament known as the SAP Open. They all need to be recorded with the sponsor name if applicable. Thanks. Can people either respond here or on my talkpage. 03md 21:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Williams Sisters rivalry Templates
I just wanted to see if I could get the Tennis community at large to take a look at the Williams Sisters rivalry page. It has a couple of tags on it which seem to me to be overstated and unnecessary. It is of course imperfect and all suggestions are welcome, but the accusations of it needing to a)possibly be completely rewritten and b)focused on intricate detail seem overstated. Thanks. AlonsornunezComments 19:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Bio infoboxes
Is it just me or are the biography infoboxes showing up {{{USOpenDoublesresult}}} (e.g. see Justine Henin's page), presumably because she didn't have a single US Open doubles result? Could someone who knows about templates take a look as it needs to be fixed. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Tennis
The Tennis article needs a major work over, I did some edits when I found it really needed big attention. Yosef1987 (talk) 15:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Maybe we can mark what is needed and divide the work? Yosef1987 (talk) 15:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
RfC: Resolving Miami/Key Biscayne Dispute
The question here generally relates to the location of tennis tournaments, and whether references by various media sources and tennis' governing bodies (ATP, ITF, WTA) are to be followed are to be followed in regards to the above. The specfic issue here in the Miami Masters and its location in Key Biscayne (a small village in Miami-Dade county and considered part of the Miami metro area) versus the various references to simply 'Miami' (by the above mentioned sources) Questions include a)whether there is suitable reference to use Miami and not Key Biscayne, b) whether such reference is to be respected, and c)how to proceed in a manner honoring both the sources and a reference to Key Biscayne (if such an outcome is possible). Salient points are in this talk section above, starting in January 2009. AlonsornunezComments 17:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Mendaliv, thanks for jumping in with this. Part of the issue (I think for the community as a whole, though I'm not sure) is that the tournament is referred to/'nicknamed' "Miami" by the ATP, the WTA and various aticles. (i.e. "So-and-son is defending champion in Miami this week", "So-and-so is six-time Miami champion", etc.) There are absolutely enough sources for "Miami" to pass muster. I have no problem with either location given lead in a joint article reference, but I think that 'Common Usage' would seem to dictate that Miami is used (for example of this, the official ATP Miami page mentions Miami twice and Key Biscayne not at all) In addition, while being a tricky subject, it would help TenEx if you did not infer an attempt to obfuscate on my part by stating that I am "making things so difficult". The questions as you phrased them above are disingenuous and specious. AlonsornunezComments 16:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Results tables
I've just noticed that many bio articles now have "sortable" results tables. Not a bad idea, as long as the tables are completed correctly. For instance, dates should be added to the table using the {{dts}} template so the sorting occurs chronologically, rather than alphabetically. Similarly, the {{sortname}} template ought to be used for opponent's names as we should be sorting these columns on surnames, not first names. So, we must either remove the "sortable" from the table class or use these templates. Thoughts? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:18, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
It sounds like just the sort of tedious edits that I like to torture myself with. To be honest, I've become a little lost since finishing the List of female tennis players "project". Can The Rambling Man be a little more specific with what is needed? I'm not very au fait with tables or templates. Do you know of an example which uses {{dts}} & {{sortname}} appropriately? Maedin\talk 14:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
All the detailed results in biographies
Almost all of the major players (by which I mean historically Sampras, Connors, Lendl, Becker etc, Graf, Navratilova, Seles, etc) have a huge swath of tables in intricate detail. While the general "size of articles" criteria exclude tables (which is very odd, and needs review in light of these incredibly detailed and lengthy tables), it's now becoming clear (especially going back through this talk page archive) that we need to deal with the tables in a constructive manner. So, as per a number of association football articles that I've reviewed, worked on, helped promote to featured status, we need to decide on how best to fork this intricate detail to another article. First and foremost we need a useful and generic nomenclature for these results forks (e.g. List of Andy Murray's tournament results or similar - please suggest better...) so we can keep any intricate detail superfluous to a well summarised article.
Secondly we need a consensus between the expert writers that aiming for GA or FA is the right approach. There's no point in editors making an effort to meet the GA or FA criteria only to be boldly reverted for a discussion which will never be concluded as a result of an essay rather than following good Wikipedia guidelines and policies. We should make strident efforts to avoid unconstructive edits and head for good and featured articles. It isn't that difficult as long as we edit as a community. Good luck everyone! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Anyone here interested in getting Wikiproject Tennis' first featured article or featured list?
As regular readers here are aware, this project is bereft of good or featured articles. Some quick research on other Wikiprojects reveals:
- Football (6 featured topics, 50 FAs [including retired and current players], 90 FLs [including national and third division teams], around 200 GAs)
- Cricket (28 FAs, 25 FLs, 59 GAs)
while
- Tennis (2 FAs [both video games], 4 GAs)
I'm proposing that we attempt to take a stable article (probably about a retired player, or a particular tournament [obviously not Key Miami Biscayne Masters...!]), compare it up against the WP:FAC or WP:FLC or WP:GAC, depending on the article and how condfident we're feeling, identify areas of improvement, possibly using peer review and then just go for it. Anyone willing to (1) nominate some candidate articles/lists and (2) join me in this intrepid journey? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
I recently got Federer-Nadal rivalry to GA. Perhaps we could try to get it to FA. My schedule is busy these days so I don't have much time for wikipeida, though, and have no intention of doing so by myself. Also, the Sampras article is a good choice to get to GA. Thing is, I looked at it and no mention of his recent Autobiography! If any of you read the whole book (I lost interest after a couple of chapters) there is a lot of useful info there. --Armchair info guy (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't know if anyone wants to join me, but after getting Laura Robson to GA (really easy, but no hope for FA), I'm going to take a stab at Roger Federer. That'll be difficult, though, seeing how bloated it is right now... Noble Story (talk o contributions) 01:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Serena Williams to be prepared for Featured Article nomination
Several editors believe that this might be the first tennis-related article to be nominated, and even to be promoted. We are keen to attract editors to the article over the next month. The timeline for nomination is vaguely by the end of May. Please join in! Tony (talk) 14:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Julian Myrick
Someone might be interested in wikignomery on this one, I just declined the speedy deletion on this hall-of-famer. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 04:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Infobox help?
Hi guys, I have just turned Claire Curran into an article from a redirect, but have a problem with my infobox. I don't have any singles grand slam data so deleted the relevant parameters, but I'm still getting the heading and placeholders for the tournaments. Does someone know what I've done wrong? Maedin\talk 19:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Tennis expert RfC
This is to notify members of WikiProject Tennis that User:Tennis expert, one of your fellow tennis article editors, is currently up for a user conduct RfC. Please see the RfC here: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tennis expert. --/Mendaliv/2¢/?'s/ 00:39, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Tennis article guidelines
Per a suggestion at the Tennis expert RfC by Ordinary Person, I think it would be a fine idea to write some specific guidelines for writing tennis articles, along the lines of WP:VG/GL or WP:ROADS#Structure of articles. --/Mendaliv/2¢/?'s/ 12:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) hard to say. I don't know what X or Y amount of words looks like. I've never thought in terms of word-count when making edits here. My general guideline is to be as concise as I can while including any verifiable fact I consider useful. If anything, I err on the side of a little too much info, especially if it makes the article more intersting. I don't like prose that is obviously constrained by word-count or some other length metric. Good prose, even if lengthy, is far better than something that is obviously forced to be brief. I like what you suggested in your straw-man guideline about lengthy "Career" sections being their own article, but perhaps they should just be lengthy if they deserve to be lenghty, like a Federer or Sampras. So what if it's a long article. People will read (and enjoy) well-written prose packed with useful info. --Armchair info guy (talk) 02:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Overall organization of tennis articles
I understand, looking at the Talk archives, that the "Tennis" article was once too long, and so it was broken into separate articles that address topics in more depth. This is fine, and I appreciate the effort that's gone into the articles so far. But I think there's a problem with this part of the arrangement:
- "Tennis" has a section on the play of a single point, while also linking to a whole article on the subject, "Point (tennis)". The blurb on the "Tennis" page about points is almost the same size as the "more detailed" text in "Point (tennis)". (Edit: It looks a little longer since my edits to that article, since it now uses bullet points. Anyway, just to clarify, my point here was that the amount of detail on scoring a point did not warrant its own article separate from an article on scoring the overall match, and I still hold that opinion.)
- A second portion of "Point (tennis)" is devoted to explaining the new electronic scoring system, which severely overlaps with another discussion of the same topic in the main article, "Tennis", under the "Officials" section.
- The "Officials" section in "Tennis" links to a more detailed article, "Official (tennis)", which explains the human officials' jobs wonderfully but fails to so much as mention that they can all be overridden by the electronic systems.
- A third portion of "Point (tennis)" is devoted to alternate rules, which are also explained in the "Tennis" article's section "Rules variations", and "Rules variations" links to Types of tennis match, which contains very little material that is not redundant of "Rules variations" and is marked as a stub.
- "Tennis" has a separate section on "Scoring" which links to the "Tennis score" article. This article actually contains a lot of unique information which belongs in a separate article, though it duplicates, for the third time, the alternate scoring rules covered in "Point (tennis)", the main "Tennis" article, and "Types of tennis match". It contains no information on how to win a point, as all that information was segregated into "Point (tennis)".
- "Tennis score" has a section called "Scoring each game" which contains three whole paragraphs on the possible (and highly disputed) origins of tennis terminology. It has another trivial paragraph devoted to explaining how certain terms are equivalent under alternative rules.
All of this separation actually makes the Wikipedia summation of the rules harder to follow than the official rules from the ITF (which only take up 13 pages, and that's with lots of explanations surrounding each rule). May I suggest:
- Merging "Point (tennis)" into "Tennis score", since they are in fact about two levels of the same thing (scoring a point and scoring a match, respectively). The actual meat of "Point (tennis)" is only about five normal-sized paragraphs and could go into "Tennis score"'s section "Scoring each game" without making that section much longer than it is now, if we remove the parts I mentioned above to a more suitable location.
- A more suitable location for the tennis term etymology in "Tennis score" would be a separate section in the main "Tennis" article or even putting that speculation into the "Glossary of tennis" entries for each term; anywhere but right in the middle of how to score a game!
- Merge worthwhile info from the section on electronic scoring systems in "Point (tennis)" with the info in the "Officials" section in "Tennis" (it won't make "Tennis" noticeably longer) and make sure to mention the role that these systems now (can) play on the "Official (tennis)" page.
- The material on alternate scoring rules is not lengthy even if one combines all the unique info from its four locations, so we can merge that info (again, from "Point (tennis)", "Tennis score", the "Tennis" article section "Rules variations", and "Types of tennis match") into either "Tennis score" or "Tennis"'s "Rules variations", with the other article of the two merely linking to that section. The bit of text from "Tennis score" about how "No-Ad" rules affect terminology can go with the actual text that explains what "No-Ad" means.
The above suggestions will cut back on lots of redundant text (which is a pain to maintain), place a number of paragraphs in better locations, and remove two whole unneeded articles from the arrangement. What do you all think? And sorry if it's a lot to take in at once, but it's all interwoven, so I didn't see an advantage to (a) bringing up these things separately or (b) "being bold" and making edits myself without informing others of the overall purpose behind the changes. --Iritscen (talk) 19:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Pre-WTA entrance rankings
Can any of you help out a brother? I would like any info/refs on the methods used to rank players for the purpose of tournament entrance and seeding prior to the development of the WTA rankings.Ordinary Person (talk) 01:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
X Player career history
As an active member of WP:NBA, I can say that there are many FA/GAs of major players (Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Yao Ming, et al.), and none of them have required a separate section for their career history. However, I already see Maria Sharapova career history, and talk of doing the same for others. I would strongly urge that this not take place. It creates an unnecessary fork, and something that will probably not be kept up with very well, in comparison to the main article. Especially considering most tennis players have shorter careers than basketball players, I think that this can and should be avoided at all costs. Noble Story (talk o contributions) 09:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Request For Comment/ Tennis Expert
A Request for Comment was filed in regards to the behavior of Tennis Expert recently. An attempt is now being made to further involve editors seen as further from the center of the disagreement. The request can be found here. Any and all editors are encouraged to leave their input. AlonsornunezComments 15:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Flags for Taiwanese players
I've noticed that in some tennis articles, the Chinese Taipei flag is used. In others, the Republic of China flag is used. e.g. the Chan Yung-jan article has the ROC flag, whereas the CT flag is used against Chan Yung-jan's name in 2007 Wimbledon Championships - Women's Singles. Do we have a standard policy on this? Should we have one? Does it matter? Ordinary Person (talk) 00:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
1rd
Searching for the typo "1rd" turns up a disproportionate number of tennis articles: Teimuraz Gabashvili, Mahesh Bhupathi, Igor Kunitsyn and Dominika Cibulková. Is it just an English-as-a-foreign-language problem, confusing "first" with "third" to get "1RD"? Or is there an arcane tennis term known only to you WikiProject people? That is, does "1RD" mean something like "1 RateD"? Art LaPella (talk) 15:39, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Ordinary Person (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikitables for Grand Slams
The wikitables for the U.S. Open and the Australian Open do not match, and need to be changed to be in line with wikipedia's consistency standards. The navbox and infobox for the Australian are in yellow yet in the wikitables they are blue, and the U.S. Open the navbox and infobox is blue yet in the wikitables it is yellow. This is inconsistent usage of color if color is to be applied on wikipedia it has to be consistent. The new wikitables say on the Serena Williams and Pete Sampras pages do not match the others and need to be reverted back to have wins in the top and the runner's up in the lower. Not all condenced into one wikitable. This can and could be rather confusing to the un-trained eye. Wikipedia is about making content accessible and easily readable to the user and the experienced editors on here. The lack of standards when it comes to the Tennis Project and articles needs to be made mainstreamed like the Golf Project is doing to their articles. Thanks for listening! TennisAuthority 18:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
2009 Sony Ericsson Open
The article is peer review over here. Comments are welcome in improving the article. LeaveSleaves 19:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Separate year articles
I just noticed two articles created for a player's performance in a single year: Rafael Nadal in 2009 and Roger Federer in 2008 stating increasing article length as the reason ([1], [2]). I believe this is an increase and not a solution to the overgrowing problem of excessive details in the articles. Creating separate article for statistics for a major player makes sense, but articles for individual years not only creates unnecessary forks but also reduces quality of existing articles (years 2009 in Nadal's article and 2008 in Federer's article now read a single line). The problems with article size needs to be addressed by conforming to more summary style writing and trimming of excessive details as was attempted at Andy Murray. I think year-by-year forking of the articles needs to be stopped. LeaveSleaves 23:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Terrible color and centering
Ok I was going through the French Open article today and there has been a mass change for the "worse" in its appearance. It has looked pretty standard for years and now the color changes look poor and unprofessional (they should be white like other encyclopedias), and the centering looks poor on 19 and 21 inch monitors. Why this change for the worse? The French page was almost unreadable in it's new state. There was no discussion on the individual page or I would have spoken up right quick. I changed some back so I could read them but then I noticed ALL of the championship pages have been changed so I though we better talk here before everything gets out of whack. I'm gone for a week starting sunday so I thought I should speak now before the damage goes too far by the time I get back. Thanks Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- List of Australian Open Men's Singles champions
- List of Australian Open Women's Singles champions
- List of French Open Men's Singles champions
- List of French Open Women's Singles champions
- List of Wimbledon Gentlemen's Singles champions
- List of Wimbledon Ladies' Singles champions
- List of US Open Men's Singles champions
- List of US Open Women's Singles champions --Preceding unsigned comment added by TennisAuthority (talk o contribs) 22:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
tennis_expert keeps doing the same with anonymous IPs
This time, he's using 75.34.102.227
I am tired of the "Key Biscane, Florida" instead of Miami, like it should be, so I'm going to take out the key biscane for all the articles related to the Miami master series. I know they're like a hundred or even more, but they are going to be changed, even with tennisexpert reverting continuously. Korlzor (talk) 16:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
And for 100th time, the Key Biscayne spam war starts again
Now the 2009 season will start, tables are being changed and Key Biscayne is starting to being spammed replacing Miami again.
So we are going to have the 100th Anti Key Byscaine Spam war. I don't give a shit what are u going to say TE, It's just I dont care where it is hold. It's called Miami. DOT.
Korlzor (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
The name of the tournament is the "Sony Ericsson Open", not the "Miami Masters". So, it's not valid to argue that "Miami Masters" is the name of the tournament and the tournament is held in Key Biscayne. This encyclopedia is concerned with verifiable facts, not with marketing strategies. Fact #1 is that the tournament is held in a tennis complex in Key Biscayne, Florida, a separate city from Miami. Fact #2 is that the name of the tournament is the Sony Ericsson Open. As for the Kolzor sockpuppet's argument, Key Biscayne creates no ambiguity for our readers given the links we provide. Tennis expert (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) What about a new approach to listing the Masters tournaments that are factually correct:
- "Current tournament name (XXX Masters)"; which in this particular case would lead to
- "Sony Ericsson Open (Miami Masters)"
This would also avoid wikilinking to a redirect which is discouraged at FACs (as Key Biscayne does). Also, I don't understand the inconsistency of Tennis Expert: this edit uses different names for the Miami Masters. That is rather confusing. Well, I don't expect that any of this will be taken seriously, even it n>>1 support it and one doesn't. --HJensen, talk 23:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
At least could we stop making such changes while we are discussing this? I mean, suddently, Tennis expert changed the tournaments name on Novak Djokovic to sponsored style again (this edit)). We are not reaching anything this way. Keita24 (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
It "is" Miami...ATP says so
Just joined you guys, the tournament is in Key Biscane, okay, but it is called Miami 1000/Masters, this is what the ATP calls it and this is what the TV shows, and the commentators say (official ATP English audio), someone please fill me in with the update and the summary of the discussion, from what I understand from the Wikipedia rules, the following is needed, a reference, and consensus, and of course no socket-puppets. From the ATP tournament profile, "Sony Ericsson Open | ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami, FL, U.S.A. | March 25 - April 5, 2009"
Key Biscayne is an island located in Miami-Dade County, Florida, United States, may be that's the reason behind the ATP calling it Miami, that could be a reason, but we need to stick to sources, stick to the ATP please. (The county seat is the City of Miami.)
Also from the ATP website: Rafael Nadal, who is coming off his 13th ATP World Tour Masters 1000 title at the BNP Paribas Open in Indian Wells, looks to win his first title at the Sony Ericsson Open. The two-time Miami finalist is looking to become the sixth different player (since 1991) to accomplish the Indian Wells-Miami title sweep.
The bold to show my point, no shouting here what so ever, make Wikipedia better and please stop the wars.
And lastly, from here: ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami, FL, U.S.A. | Sony Ericsson Open | ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Yosef1987 (talk) 21:56, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Please read the note below the table on this page, and I am sure there are more examples, it has nothing to do with a location, they don't hate KB, but they've chosen an official name for it, and that is a verifiable reference, as well as it IS played in KB, but we are talking about the tournament and not the place, a player wins Miami Masters and not KB Masters. I really didn't add anything new here, just confirming my point of just pointing out the real location only in the tournament's article itself. Yosef1987 (talk) 15:12, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
My 2 cents please
Having just watched the QF between Fed and Rod, on the back of the court, where it says 2 big "Sony Ericsson", below it near the ground it says Miami all over the place
If there is a tournament in Cairo, Egypt and ATP decided to call it New York City Masters, for the encyclopedic entry, it would be named NYC masters, but it'd mention in the tournament's article that it is played in Cairo. I don't see Key Biscayne mentioned in the Miami Masters article (would you rename the article?); what I am saying is, mention it in the article's page, and that's it. And for what it's worth, Key Biscayne's county seat is the city of Miami. Stick to the official tournament names for an encyclopedia's sake. Now whoever is making those edits, would you please let me know in a clear fashion where I went wrong? And those who support/would like to add something, please do. Thank you! Yosef1987 (talk) 03:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Added bolds, is not shouting, sticking out the points only. Yosef1987 (talk) 23:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
We need to do it right please
Resolve disputes calmly, through civil discussion and consensus-building on relevant discussion pages. There are several available options to request opinions from editors outside the dispute. Other dispute resolution mechanisms include mediation or, after all other methods have been tried, arbitration.
From what I know, stick with references, from governing bodies, official names exist besides the sponsors, as mentioned a bit above. Yosef1987 (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Now what?
If this is going no where for now, I'd suggest reverting the edits made, because clearly a consensus has been reached(???), and I doubt(???) we'd need a poll for such a thing.
- The case is not only with Miami Masters, but as demonstrated, with others
- There is an official tournament name (other than the ever changing sponsor name) that we need to stick to, as demonstrated
- The correct location must be added to the tournaments' articles, that's for sure, and TE helped point out that
- From now on, as the rules say, we should discuss first before starting an edit-war
- Let's get to somewhere please quickly Yosef1987 (talk) 21:54, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Alone
Am I the only one on this? I have changed it on Nadal's page, TE changed it back, without saying anything here. Please TE when you get here, the simple 4 points above, I need a direct reply to each one, thank you. Yosef1987 (talk) 12:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
ATTENTION
Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Miami_Masters, feel free to add yourself and sign. Yosef1987 (talk) 13:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Can we have some sanity and resolution on this?
I just wish to note two things;
Tennis expert, your refusal to accept mediation on this long running dispute is both unhelpful and disruptive. You are not doing yourself or Wikipedia any favours in continuing this series of reverts against others wishes. Wikipedia can only work by consensus. Personal crusades, no matter how right you believe you are, ultimately get you nowhere. If you genuinely care about the content of these articles, then please accept mediation.
IP editor; I don't care who you are or if you have been previously blocked or not. Your jumping between IPs to edit war is a clear breach and evasion of Wikipedia rules and policies. That alone makes your contributions unwelcome and disruptive. If you genuinely care about the content of these articles, then please register an account and contribute to the discussion in an upfront manner without this edit warring. I would also urge other editors to refuse to engage this editor in discussion until they register. If, once they register, they prove to be a banned user, then so be it. If you disregard Wikipedia policy you lose the privilege of contributing to it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Vandalism/Warring
If this is considered vandalism, we can do it the right way, first warn him/her/they on their talk pages, and then, if they don't respond, this will definitely help. Yosef1987 (talk) 17:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Keeping everything above board, just letting everyone know that I have (again) reverted TenEx's changes to the various Miami Masters year-specific pages regarding this very issue. I am not engaging in a edit war, just keeping things 'as is' until a consensus is reached. TenEx, please act in good faith and stop reverting until this issue is concluded (As an aside, you said that you are going for consensus instead on individual pages, but after I reverted you ignored BRD and instead changed again instead of taking the issue to the talk page. I read that as rather disingenuous.) AlonsornunezComments 14:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
My Inquiry to Tennis_expert
I now understand your urge behind KB, but I have got few questions which would clarify things to me.
- KB is the location, but not the tournament name, right?
- If Miami Masters is not a tournament name, how come it is shown on the ATP official TV coverage, news articles etc? Of course besides Sony Ericsson
- For the factual accuracy of an encyclopedia, I am supporting you, as I have said before, to mention the correct locations in each tournament's individual article, why isn't that good enough? And for the enough part, the following point:
- We cannot put Sony Ericsson of course in the Performance Timelines, but we also cannot put Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, the column if for the tournament not the location, and the tournaments are not named after the exact correct location, where did I go wrong here? (I am asking)
- They are named after the closest most famous city, do I have proof? No, but a pattern is clear no doubt. Tell me where I went wrong also here.
I would very much appreciate your answers. Thanks. Yosef1987 (talk) 22:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Edit: as for the "encouragement to war", it was never meant to be like that, and I hope you find my good faith in my edits, what I meant is to keep things as it was till we resolve the matter, and by that I wanted your confirmation as well on this, am not asking for anything wrong. Yosef1987 (talk) 23:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
My suggestion
Tennis_expert, is right about these answers, TE has talked sense about the issue into me, give it time to read it, you'd feel the same, and as for the Wikipedia rules, TE is dead on. My suggestion to keep everything right, that is to name the tournaments in the performance time-lines by the real location, (e.g. Key Biscayne and Roquebrune-Cap-Martin etc) and having after it between parenthesis () the widely known misled name, (e.g. Miami, Monte Carlo etc), on the other hand, we'd go for the sponsors names, which follows this very well. Keep it cool, because we are moving in a circle now. Yosef1987 (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Edit: And please, for the meanwhile, no further edits to be made until this is resolved in a good manner. All suggestions and comments are welcome, keep them direct to the point and cool please. Yosef1987 (talk) 16:58, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
An additional option: many older fans refer to this tournament as "Key Biscayne" (or even as "the Lipton"). A parenthesis near the top of the article--as for other sports events and venues whose official name has changed--could clarify that this tournament was for many years sponsored by Lipton and for many years referred to commonly as alternatively "the Lipton" or "Key Biscayne". Of course, considering what goes before on this page, I don't dare change a word on the main page! C. Cerf (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Men's Grand Slam Championships
This page does not have to be in chronogical order because even the Wikipedia:GOLF articles are not in reverse or chronogical order, which means it's up to the editor that creates the content to decide. If you want to change it do so without deleting it because that is not correct under the good faith system on wikipedia. TennisAuthority 15:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Fact check request on Anne Minter
Can an interested editor please fact check the Anne Minter article for me? I ran into any editor, subsequently blocked, who really expanded the article, but also had a fixation at adding in an unsourced WP:BLP issue. While everything remaining looks okay to me, I really do not know the subject very well. Can some interested editors please stop by the article to take a look? Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Tables
Shouldn't we restore all the tables with the grand slam, ATP Masters series etc results to the way they were before? Like put them under the "Wins" and "runner-up" titles instead of having the "outcome" column. It would be easier to see how many times a player has won or come second in a tournament. JayJ47 (talk) 08:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Need a rating
Hi. I don't know if this is the place to ask, but Oliver Golding needs an initial starter rating at the article talk page. Thanks. 86.112.188.247 (talk) 13:42, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
WTA site
Looks like the WTA is restructuring their website.
Looks like their player profiles are going to have new URLs, and they aren't going to redirect the old ones.
Looks like I'm going to cry...Ordinary Person (talk) 06:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Number of titles policy
Hi, I was wondering what the policy was for stating the number of titles won by a player on tournament articles. Some statistics incorporate both singles and doubles into the statistic e.g. this article but others only include the figure for the relevant competition e.g. this article. 03md 16:39, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Major win-loss counts
There seems to be some inconsistency about the place in the win-loss counts for the Majors: for some players only the main draw matches are included, and for others the qualifiers are also included. Do we have a standard on this?Ordinary Person (talk) 11:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Tennis article at PR
List of ATP number 1 ranked players is now at Peer review. Feel free to make comments and keep adding references and information to the list. Hopefully we will get the first tennis FL. Cheers. 03md 13:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Sharapova GAR
I have nominated Maria Sharapova for Good Article Reassessment. Please feel free to add comments here ?or, better still, improve the article. Also, you can review my comments and concerns here
Career Stats Pages!
I just created two more Margaret Court career statistics, Evonne Goolagong career statistics, and John Newcombe career statistics, which I would appreciate it if someone fixed those to be like all the others'! Thanks TennisAuthority 22:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Borg-Connors rivalry
Made this page, look at it and edit away!TennisAuthority 02:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Start Boxes Templates for Tennis Player?
I have created these for implementation, but do not have time to do all tennis players, which means that I need your all's help in this matter. The main one to use as an example is Template:Roger Federer start boxes TennisAuthority 21:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
I was asked to give my opinion, so here it is. Good. :-D The thing is, I'm one of those folks that tends to find overuse of succession boxes very annoying. I love the idea of making them hideable. I actually hope the idea spreads. Succession boxes are wonderful but with accomplished athletes, they can get insane. There are other examples of something like this. Tennis Authority is right...it is on the Tiger Woods article as well. I don't think it's useful if someone only has 1 or 2 succession boxes on their page but I think it is beyond 2. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 04:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Womens Rivalry Pages!
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHeadIntro/0,,12781,00.html
This is where to go to look them up, and have at it editors!TennisAuthority 03:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Rivalry
Graf-Sanchez-Vicario
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2718~7184,00.html
Sanchez-Vicario-Seles
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~7184~7354,00.html
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2188~5744,00.html
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2718~5744,00.html
Evert-Goolagong
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2188~2794,00.html
Graf-Seles
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2718~7354,00.html
Evert-Court
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2188~1285,00.html
Court-King
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~1285~4011,00.html
Court-Goolagong
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~1285~2794,00.html
Goolagong-King
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~2794~4011,00.html
Henin-Serena
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~3541~9044,00.html
Henin-Venus
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/page/HeadToHead/0,,12781~3541~9027,00.html
Done for now!TennisAuthority 03:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Major problems with article on the Orange bowl
The article on the Orange Bowl conflates two COMPLETELY DISTINCT junior tournaments, leading to major inaccuracies. I've left a more detailed explanation on the talk page of the article. Innocent76 (talk) 07:34, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Go Here to make rivalry pages!
From:TennisAuthority! I have lost my passion for wikipedia and will not be comming back! Have a good day and good life GOD BLESS --Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.240.44.215 (talk) 23:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC) First, Go Here Before You Make A Page: Category:Tennis rivalries Category:Tennis rivalries
Caution:Be Sure to tag the one you are working on while you are doing it so others' will not do it and cause duplication of content!TennisAuthority 19:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Here is a site to make the EXCEL File into an WIKITABLE Easier [[3]], which you have to import the webpage into excel by going to data tab and from web, which look how I did mine!TennisAuthority 08:30, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Process:
Step One: Open Excel
Step Two: Click Data Tab and From WEB
Step Three: Paste URL
Step Four: Take and Copy necessary part!
Step Five: Take that part into Word and Use the Replace Feature to take out Stats, and take the Reversed names and put them in correct order
Step Five: Delete Country while you are in Word
Step Six: Imput it back into Excel again
Step Seven: Create new section with Score at the top next to winner and copy that whole column also
Step Eight: Copy that into the URL above
Step Nine: Take that code and put it into word and delete the useless rows like Step Five but with alot of ||||||| and Space||
Step Ten: Input the code into page on wikipedia
Step Eleven:Take out unnecessary |- and bring score upto main rows
Step Twelve:Save the page and start writing later or whenever!
Step Thirteen:You've accomplished one try two!
By the way:This process will only work for the mens not womens!
Make to your hearts content! Think of the possibilities Connors-McEnroe, McEnroe-Lendl, Lendl-Wilander, Becker-Edberg, Agassi-Sampras, Federer-Roddick, Federer-Djokovic, Laver-Newcombe, Laver-Emerson, and much much more!TennisAuthority 02:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC) http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Player-Landing.aspx
Individual Links
Becker-Edberg
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=B028&oId=E004
Created By: TennisAuthority 08:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name: Becker-Edberg Rivalry
Agassi-Sampras
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=A092&oId=S402
Created by: TennisAuthority 08:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name: Agassi-Sampras Rivalry Created long before at Sampras-Agassi rivalry
Connors-McEnroe
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=C044&oId=M047
Created by:TennisAuthority 13:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name: Connors-McEnroe rivalry
Lendl-McEnroe
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=L018&oId=M047
Create By:TennisAuthority 13:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name:Lendl-McEnroe rivalry
Connors-Lendl
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=C044&oId=L018 TAG:TennisAuthority 19:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Created By:TennisAuthority 19:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page name: Connors-Lendl rivalry
Lendl-Wilander
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=L018&oId=W023 TAG:TennisAuthority 19:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Created By:TennisAuthority 19:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page name: Lendl-Wilander rivalry
Edberg-Lendl
Already created by:Nwill Page name: Edberg-Lendl rivalry
Federer-Roddick
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=R485
Djokovic-Federer
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=D643
Federer-Murray
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F324&oId=MC10
Djokovic-Nadal
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=D643&oId=N409
Murray-Nadal
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=MC10&oId=N409
Djokovic-Murray
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=D643&oId=MC10
Djokovic-Roddick
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=D643&oId=R485
Nadal-Roddick
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=R485
Becker-Wilander
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=B028&oId=W023 TAG:TennisAuthority 20:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Created by:TennisAuthority 20:12, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name: Becker-Wilander rivalry
Edberg-Wilander
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=E004&oId=W023 TAG:TennisAuthority 20:27, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Created by:TennisAuthority 20:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name: Edberg-Wilander rivalry
Laver-Newcombe
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=L058&oId=E030
Laver-Rosewall
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=L058&oId=R075
Laver-Newcombe
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=L058&oId=N044
Borg-Vilas
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=B058&oId=V028 TAG:TennisAuthority 02:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Created By:TennisAuthority 02:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Page Name:Borg-Vilas rivalry
McEnroe-Vilas
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=M047&oId=V028
McEnroe-Nastase
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=M047&oId=N008
This is all that I can come up with right now! TennisAuthority 03:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Do we need rivalry pages?
I'm not sure if most of these things could simply be linked to the tour page to look up yourself for fun as opposed to a separate wiki article for each one. Sure, there are some famous rivalries but most of these listed are simply standard bookkeeping records aren't they? I mean does anyone care enough about a McEnroe-Nastase rivalry to warrant an encyclopedic entry? And many of these players played before that tour chart was made so their rivalries matches are woefully incomplete. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Please remember to link the articles to the appropriate wiki-projects once a new page is created, also reference it properly otherwise the page may get deleted. Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 00:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Some sources you all might want to check out!
http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/tennis/gallery/08_25_06_greats/
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/68894-seven-famous-tennis-rivalries
http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/ten-great-tennis-rivalries-1429447.html
http://tv.sky.com/top-tennis-rivalries
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/27/nyregion/old-tennis-rivalries-resume.html
Go Look! TennisAuthority 17:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated the Federer-Hewitt rivalry page for deletion. Ciao! Chidel (talk) 23:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
I am a bit split on this, but I have a proposal. If the players have played each other at least ten (10) times (Maybe some higher number?)...AND had an "even" win-loss ratio? If not, then a "rivalry" section could be added to their pages, but not a whole page?
- We also need to NOT increase the size of players with long careers (like Martina) who could be reputed to have rivalries with quite a number of players. -- Mjquin_id (talk) 02:36, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
ATP Site
With the redesign of the ATP's site, it looks like our links to player profiles are all now broken. Has anyone thought about, er, a plan? I'll be happy to help out. GreenGourd (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
- Go to the player's ATP profile page
- Invoke "View source" in your browser
- Search for "initPlayerLiveScoreParam" in the HTML source
- You'll find something like initPlayerLiveScoreParams('X123');, and in that case "X123" is what you're looking for
- Go to the player's ATP profile page
- In the "Head to head" edit box on the right enter any player and submit
- You'll see their head to head record, and pId in the URL is the ID in question
All RIvalry Pages must be deleted or kept!
Category:Tennis rivalries Even the Federer-Nadal and Williams' Sisters because they are current and history has not had the time to judge them yet! Plus, the old ones have not many internet sources to add, which does not make them unnotable!
- Keep: This is what I believe is should happen, but if some say delete: delete the hole darn bunch!TennisAuthority 22:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
TennisAuthority has lost passion for all of wikipedia and is done and never coming back, so GOD BLESS and have a good day and good life! --Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.240.44.215 (talk) 23:15, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Players' Twitters
Hm, I've been noticing a few players have been using the Twitter service. Would it be a good idea to include this on their Twitter pages as part of the external link sections? Some of the players who have one are Serena Williams, Andy Roddick, Andy Murray, Sam Querrey... Yea? Nay? oncamera(t) 02:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Add HOF to Infobox?
Golf does this to the infobox, and I don't understand why tennis doesn't do this, too? This needs to be linked to the hall-of-fame page of the player!98.240.44.215 (talk) 18:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Source of Images
I have organised some free images that relate to cricket on Flickr. There is the set [4] of freely usable images. I can upload them to Wikipedia/WikiCommons and avaliable for use, on request. Please alert me on my talk page as I will most likely not return here, thanks, The Windler talk 11:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Update?
Hello, Just posting here to let the WikiProject know that 2009 ITF Women's Circuit needs to be updated. I would do it myself but I just don't have the time. Thanks. - Nick C (t·c) 23:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Current Rankings
Can we introduce a current ranking section in the infobox that normally exists on a player's page? It shows their career high but one often has to dig through the article to find their actual ranking so I propose that the current ranking would go underneath the career high. The ranking is very easily available on the ATP website and as such it would be easy to update and would make it easier for people to gauge a player's current level without having to search the article. Jom (talk) 14:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
2003 & 2005 US Women's Open Draw Sheet to make bracket!
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/SEWTATour-Archive/Archive/Draws/2005/905.pdf 2005 US Open - Women's Singles
http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/SEWTATour-Archive/Archive/Draws/2003/905.pdf 2003 US Open - Women's SinglesDONE
I did the 2001, which somebody else can do the 2003 & 2005! These two are the only two that are need and can be done with sources right now left to do!TW-RF (talk) 06:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Changing Pages?
Hello, I found a User:Officially Mr X changing the wimbledon page to be different from the other slams, which I reverted back twice now! These are the artilcles to monitor!TW-RF (talk) 21:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
- List of Australian Open champions
- List of French Open champions
- List of Wimbledon champions
- List of US Open champions
Grunting article
There needs to be an article on grunting (or whatever you want to call it) I think. It's gained so much press coverage and former players are calling for it to be banned etc. What are your thoughts? Spiderone (talk) 16:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
GA
How about in the next year we aim to get, Tennis, History of tennis, Wimbledon, Australian Open, French Open, US Open to GA status? Anyone here willing to give one a go? Aaroncrick(Tassie Boy talk) 10:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Tennis Infobox HOF!
I would really appreciate it if some other editors will go and implement this after career prize money! The one below is for Pete Sampras, but I have done Steffi Graf, so you all could have two examples to go off of!
| tennishofyear = 2007 | tennishofid = 243
Happy Editing Away!98.240.44.215 (talk) 17:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
A:98.240.44.215 (talk) 22:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC) Done all that had infoboxes!
B:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC) Done all that had tennis player infoboxes for this one and all below!
C:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
D:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
E:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
F:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
G:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
H:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
J:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
K:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
L:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
M:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
N:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
O:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
P:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Q:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
R:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
S:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
T:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
V:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
W:TW-RF (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Links to fansites
Your opinions about whether and under what circumstances tennis biographies should include links to fansites would be welcome on the Andy Murray discussion page. Chidel (talk) 09:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Capitalization
Is there a reason, a prior consensus, which accounts for the fact draw pages and several other articles on the tennis project use capitalization like "Men's Singles", "Women's Singles", etc... As the list of Wimbledon Gentlemen's Singles champions is currently being reviewed to eventually become a Featured List, the question of whether the article should stay at this title or moved at "List of Wimbledon gentlemen's singles champions" has been raised. I'm not asking for the thousands of draw pages to be moved to non-capitalized versions, but if there is no good consensus about that perhaps we should, per MoS, move the lists of this template :
--Don Lope (talk) 23:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
There is some new person insisting that Navratilova's flag needs to be the Czech flag before she was a US citizen. I was always under the impression that the flag was for the country you intended to represent. Was there a ruling around here I missed? In 1975, upon defection, she lost her Czech citizenship so if not US does she get no flag at all? Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Not Stateless, CRAZY ASUMPTION!
I question your premise and understanding of asylum to begin with because as soon as she left czechslovakia, she was made an ad hoc American. She competed therefore as an American! I want you to go and even look at her two Wimbledon's in 1978 and 1979 to verify that fact because those are the ones in question. I am the user that has made this adjustment upon my research, wbich is what wikipedian editors are suppose to do, which they don't like yourself! I will put a link here for you to look to stop this junk http://aeltc2009.wimbledon.org/en_GB/about/history/rolls/ladiesroll.html. This makes it official, which I did cite on the appropriate pages, and it needs to stay that way because this is their record and needs to be ours on wikipedia as well. So, all 18 and 9 wimbledon's were won as a sole american. She competed as an american from the end of the 1975 US Open onwards, which was based on the tennis channel documentary! That's all! 98.240.44.215 (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
The current WTA media guide lists "TCH" beside Navratilova's name re: 1978 and 1979 Wimbledon. Bud Collins - ditto. Chidel (talk) 10:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Wimbledon Tournament Titles
The official website refers to the tournaments played there as the "Gentlemen's Singles" and "Ladies' Singles", so why do the pages at Wimbledon refer to them as the "Men's Singles" and "Women's Singles"? The same is true of the other events, I'm just using Men and Women as an example. Surely pages such as 2009 Wimbledon Championships - Men's Singles should reflect this?
Apologies if this was raised elsewhere, or if I'm putting it in the wrong place.
Alex Holowczak (talk) 09:21, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Open Era
Hey, tennis folk. I'm not at all sure why this bothers me, but it does. (Go figure.) Our articles are not consistent when it comes to the capitalization of this ubiquitous phrase. The three contenders are: Open Era, Open era, and open era. Embarrassingly enough, examples of all three can be found in Open Era. I would advocate capitalization of both terms (i.e., Open Era) to conform to the journalistic norm and to the capitalization of other kinds of eras (Mesozoic Era, anyone?). But each of the three contenders could be justified, and I'm more interested in consistency than anything else. Is it possible to achieve a consensus? GreenGourd (talk) 00:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Nationalities
There are inconsistencies in regards to what country flag to put on a player. Two players in particular. Martina Navratilova and Molla Mallory. I'm not convinced which way it should be but the two (to me at least) are in total opposition to each other and we should make some sort of ruling for the article's sake. Martina Navratilova lost her Czech citizenship in 1975 when she came to the US but didn't become a US citizen till 1981 yet many of her listings show a Czech flag in the 1975-1981 years. However Molla Mallory came to the US in 1915 from Norway (I believe she retained her Norwegian citizenship), played and won the US Championships yet instantly gets a US flag? I have no idea if she ever became a citizen. What determines a country flag status on wiki so that we can be consistent here? Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
<CR>I'm not saying consistency over all of wikipedia. Martina and Molla have different flags for those years depending on what article you read. I would have had US flags for both of them for consistency but if consensus says otherwise that's fine too. Just so they aren't different everywhere I look. If that means no flags then so be it, however since Molla doesn't say when (or if) she gained US citizenship she would never get a flag of any kind through the rest of her years. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Use of the Terminology ATP Titles
On some player pages, such as that of Michael Russell (tennis), the total number of ATP titles includes Challenger and Future level titles. In official ATP statistics, contained both on their website and in other sources, the term ATP Titles is reserved for titles won at the ATP World Tour 250, 500, 1000, and Grand Slam levels and excludes Challengers and Futures. So, the incorrect heading of ATP Titles could be changed to "professional titles" to make the tally correct. Or, there could be a new heading made for ATP level and one for lower-level events. Notice how on pages of more accomplished players, such as Andy Roddick, the lower-level titles are not listed. This issue should be standardized. Yesitsnot (talk) 19:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
top tennis players template up for deletion
Template:Top ten tennis players is up for deletion. Figured I'd put this here because it's been relisted with a currently 3-2 vote. I think it's a pretty useful template, especially considering there isn't a page (that I can find) that lists who is in the top ten for either men's or women's doubles. Morhange (talk) 22:34, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Daniela_Hantuchová
Please see Talk:Daniela_Hantuchová#Ridiculously_overblown_article - I'm looking for people to help make this article more like an encyclopedia one and less like it belongs in a specialist tennis publication or fanzine. --Dweller (talk) 13:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I disagree with all you all, because to a tennis encyclopedic article to be historic it must have head-to-head wins and losses between the players. This is to provide a historical perspective not some fanzine, which is sited to much with these tennis players bio's. It must be done for all players, which means even for the fair players like Hantuchova. This has become consensus to put in head-to-head, and if you don't agree go look at Federer, Graf, Evert, SWilliams, VWilliams, Navratilova, Nadal, and more I could name. This article is in line with the developmental standards for content. Thanks!98.240.44.215 (talk) 00:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
98, you say there's consensus for these stats being in articles. I wouldn't want to edit against consensus. Can you point me to the discussions? I take consensus very seriously. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 11:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Table of contents limit
Is there any reason for the contents to be so limited? I changed the Andy Murray one to show one more section of the tree but was quickly reverted. However, it is very difficult to navigate, particularly to the career sections, which are quite long. (On my screen each year takes up about one screen). Going to his record for this year is a bit cumbersome without the ability to link directly to it. Changing the TOC limit doesn't appear to show up anything that look particularly untoward (except maybe 'Masters Series singles finals: 5 finals (4 titles, 1 runner-up)' which should probably just be trimmed down to 'Masters Series singles finals'). I've brought this here as the person undoing my edit said this was the standard for tennis players. Quantpole (talk) 21:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
Cryan Tennis Tournament
Is the Cryan Tennis Tournament a notable tournament? It was an orphan from the time it was created in October, until today. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation
As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
FL Drive
Appears to be FL drive gathering momentum by User:Don Lope to get: List of US Open Men's Singles champions, List of Australian Open Men's Singles champions, and List of French Open Men's Singles champions to FLC soon. Any help would be great Aaroncrick (talk) 00:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Height
I'm working on the Del Potro article and I was wondering how to write his height in prose. Would "6 ft 6 in" do or should I just leave it as it is? Also why isn't the US Open final on the main page news? Spiderone 15:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I created these today, and need some other users to help with the implementing of them into each players articles! All your help will be well apreciated...Thanks in Advance.98.240.44.215 (talk) 02:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- Template:Australian Open men's doubles champions Done TW-RF
- Template:Australian Open women's doubles champions Done Armbrust
- Template:French Open men's doubles champions Done TW-RF
- Template:French Open women's doubles champions Done Armbrust
- Template:Wimbledon men's doubles champions Done TW-RF
- Template:Wimbledon women's doubles champions Done Armbrust
- Template:US Open men's doubles champions Done TW-RF
- Template:US Open women's doubles champions Done Armbrust
- Template:Year-End Championships winners doubles Done TW-RF
- Template:WTA Year-End Championships winners doubles Done Armbrust
"Too Much Detail" Template; Andy Roddick
I just want to bring to the attention of the community that an editor has input the template on the Andy Roddick article page that says: "This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. Please relocate any relevant information, and remove excessive trivia, praise, criticism, lists and collections of links. (April 2009)".
It is very detailed. But as a tennis fan, I think that's great. Others may differ.
In any event, I thought it worthwhile to bring up for discussion here. Is the template innapropriate, for a tennis player page such as Roddick's? Or is it correct, and should something be done? How much detail is appropriate? This is relevant, as I believe this banner has been input on some other (less detailed) tennis player pages as well. Tx.--Ethelh (talk) 19:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Ethelh! Maybe someone should create an Andy Roddick career statistics article to hold the detailed information? Chidel (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Fansites on External Links in Tennis Articles?
Should we allow this for all tennis players or expressidly forbid it according to the rules! Andy Murray has it, and Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal do not, and they are trying to get consensus for one lone tennis player to have this at the sake for the entire community of tennis player articles as a whole!TW-RF (talk) 02:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Let's Start a For or Against Section
Against: This is because it violates the sources doctorine of the BLP (Biography of a Living Person), and this means for all tennis and all wikipedia articles all fansites must be removed no matter their subject matter or player!TW-RF (talk) 00:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Polls are good, but this one is premised on a misconception. TW-RF incorrectly describes as relevant WP:BLP in which "sources" are discussed. Sources are used for numbered references in the article body. This poll concerns fansites in External links. External links are not sources or references, so WP:BLP doesn't apply. Milo 09:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Against: It would be virtually impossible to get "Joe Editor" to consistently implement a very fine (thin) distinction between an "authoritative" "Fact" site versus a hyped up "Fan" site. These links would be disallowed to be used as references (per BLP); therefore, I would wonder what they really offer? WP:FANSITE is directly for "External Links", and then there is WP:NOTLINK. Also, the introduction of these links would lead the IP editors to add THEIR favorite fan site; and then potentially cite "previous consensus". Sorry, but "No", we should not allow these. Does ANY project? -- Mjquin_id (talk) 03:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
List of US Open Men's Singles champions at FLC
Reviews are appreciated at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of US Open Men's Singles champions/archive1. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Grandslam Final appearances
I think that US Open Final appearances, Wimbledon Final appearances, French Open Final appearances, Australian Open Final appearances are redundant. The List of Australian Open Women's Singles champions set of lists, i.e. 4 slams, singles/doubles, men/womens have the finalists in them and basically I cannot see what additional use these "final appearances" list are. Can anyone think of a reason for keeping them? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 18:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Standardization of scores in prose
Basically I'd like to try and standardise the way scores are written. This started, when I was discussion the ambiguity of the scores we use at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Wimbledon Gentlemen's Singles champions/archive1. Below is the relevent passage of conversation:
Can we try and agree on a standardisation for tie-breaks and then try and put it in a visible place in the Project. Additionally can we try to agree on a format for match tiebreaks (see Tennis_score#Alternative_game_scoring). In Bob and Mike Bryan they use "[10-3]" but I'm not sure how commonplace this notation is) and we might as well attempt to standardise as many scoring things at once. Thanks in advance for your input on this, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 14:55, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
For my money, I'd write the tie-break scores out in full 7-6(7-3). Maybe it is because I'm from the UK, and used to that sub-consciously through Wimbledon, but anything else looks odd to me, and it isn't a form I have seen before (because in the UK, the form 7-6(2) isn't seen in print for any of the slams as far as I know. As for the section below (still regarding standardization), I would go with the subject first form, (especially for non-straight set results: Berk lost to Bloggs 6-4, 3-6, 7-6(7-4), 2-6, 4-6. Ultimately, you can always work out the order of the set wins, but extending that previous example, consistency would suggest Berk lost to Bloggs 4-6, 3-6, 6-7(4-7).--MDCollins (talk) 21:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Which way do the scores go?
Would it be:
- Berk lost to Bloggs 4-6, 2-6
or
- Berk lost to Bloggs 6-4, 6-2?
I've seen both before and there aren't really any featured articles for me to look at to compare. Spiderone 15:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Question
Question -- I've noticed (and expect all of you have as well) that when there is a tiebreaker in a score while most editors put a space in before the open paren --e.g., 7-6 (5)-- quite a number do not. Is that something that someone with bot experience can have fixed on a bot basis? As it is, there is a great deal of lack of conformity in this respect in tennis articles, and that would help I would think. Any thoughts?--Epeefleche (talk) 20:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Roger Federer GA drive
Anyone interested. I suppose I could help with referencing and expanding sections? Aaroncrick (talk) 06:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
(Outdent)Good work. Books used a refs should be under References, and in the Notes section should be a summary of the book in use, not the ISBN and all that jargon. Also I moved all the stats to the bottom of the article as where it was, the prose get broken up. Aaroncrick (talk) 22:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:ATP Masters Series/Super 9 tournaments
Template:ATP Masters Series/Super 9 tournaments has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. --RL0919 (talk) 10:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of tennis?
Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.
The Transhumanist 00:03, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
P.S.: See Wikipedia's collection of outlines at WP:OOK.
Source of the article : Wikipedia
EmoticonEmoticon