Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis: Difference between revisions

By /

 

Line 157: Line 157:

:The Tennis WikiProject’s [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tennis/Article_guidelines#Notability|guidelines for notability]] would suggest that he currently does not meets the required standard, as he hasn’t made an ATP Tour main draw or won a Challenger title. I would advise focussing on his tennis career instead of trying to get a Wikipedia article created. [[User:Iffy|Iffy]]★[[User Talk:Iffy|Chat]] — 16:58, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

:The Tennis WikiProject’s [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tennis/Article_guidelines#Notability|guidelines for notability]] would suggest that he currently does not meets the required standard, as he hasn’t made an ATP Tour main draw or won a Challenger title. I would advise focussing on his tennis career instead of trying to get a Wikipedia article created. [[User:Iffy|Iffy]]★[[User Talk:Iffy|Chat]] — 16:58, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

== I Need Help From Admins ==

Hello everyone,

I would like to ask whether there is someone here responsible for overseeing tennis-related pages. I have been actively working on improving these pages for several years, in line with existing rules. However, over time it has become clear that certain elements require updates, which usually involves discussion and agreement around potential changes. In the past, my contributions were generally well received, and I consistently tried to build constructive, professional collaboration with others involved.

That said, whenever I raise a question or propose an improvement (for example, here), I often receive no feedback at all, or responses only from a single user whose behavior I find difficult to work with. I understand that person’s position, but it is hard to believe that all responsibility rests with one individual. There should be others involved so that collaboration does not feel centralized or personal. I am fully open to accepting suggestions or criticism; the challenge arises when I notice uneven application of rules—where I receive warnings for certain changes, while similar situations are handled more leniently with other users. More importantly, I have observed that consensus is sometimes reached unilaterally, based on personal preference rather than collective agreement.

A recent example is the Jason Kubler page, where I updated a table format that has been discussed for years as needing improvement. I had previously shared proposals—both here and elsewhere—on how the table could be redesigned, but received no response. After my change was reverted, I did not attempt to reapply it. Nevertheless, I was warned based on unrelated disputes from the past, even though this situation had no connection to them.

Over the years, my consistent goal has been to improve tables and overall quality. Disagreements naturally arise, especially when opinions differ, but my intention here is not to argue with anyone. I genuinely want to understand how this process is meant to work and who is responsible.

If our shared objective is to make these pages as good as possible, cooperation is essential. Unfortunately, this user does not provide that level of collaboration, which is disappointing. While the content itself may not be compromised, the approach and communication are, in my view, unprofessional. What discourages me the most is not criticism, but the lack of constructive engagement and the ongoing difficulty, over many years, of reaching other administrators who could help facilitate balanced discussion and resolution—for me and for others as well.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. [[User:JamesAndersoon|JamesAndersoon]] ([[User talk:JamesAndersoon|talk]]) 12:11, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

icon

Template:Infobox tennis biography has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 06:39, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For two days almost every tennis player article I edited displayed an error for |residence=. I did remove a few before noticing User:Zackmann08 made that change on October 21 with an edit summary “removing support for residence per consensus“, where the consensus was for {{Infobox person}}. So I stopped removing |residence=, figuring it would get reverted. I do support removing it if that is the consensus on Template talk:Infobox tennis biography. Many of tennis player articles I edited had the same location for |residence= and |birth_place=. I believe many of those may be inaccurate and they are usually unreferenced. — Zyxw (talk) 00:53, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zyxw please see the RFC and comment there. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:59, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Already done, just commented here first since I was pinged here. — Zyxw (talk) 01:15, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, I am always looking for photos to improve Wikipedia articles but specially the tennis related ones and I’d like to ask if anyone knows of a website or platform that’s better than Flickr for finding recent photos of professional tennis players with licenses suitable for use on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons.

I have noticed that It’s been quite a while since Flickr has been a reliable source for new tennis images, because many recent photos there are either unlicensed properly or unavailable altogether. I’m wondering if there are other platforms, photographers, or archives that regularly upload freely licensed tennis photos.

Also, I’m not sure if this is the right place to ask, so let me know if there’s a more appropriate page for this kind of question. Haddad Maia fan (talk) 17:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I used to get photos on Flickr but lately they often don’t have recent photos of players or tournaments or they have it but with licensing that is not suitable to be uploaded on Wikimedia Commons Haddad Maia fan (talk) 17:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a reliable source for sure, in Wikipedia terms. But it is always hit or miss for new photos. It has always been tough to find new good pics of players that are ok to use here. I have had some luck in emailing the player’s reps and asking them to upload a pd photo, and also had Wikipedia make it too difficult for older players like Margaret Court. She and I had to give up because of too many hoops to jump through. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:34, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m still having no success with this issue. I’ve noticed that many of the players’ articles I usually edit either have very old photos or none at all. A good source would be public domain photos from government agencies, but I don’t know how to find them online. One useful website was “Rede do Esporte,” which was run by the Brazilian government, and photos taken by their photographers were suitable for Wikimedia Commons. However, the website has since been shut down. I don’t know if someone here knows any other websites from governments that have suitable photos of tennis players but if someone does, it would be very helpful. Other suitable sources would also be great
@Fyunck(click) @qwisps @Tvx1 @Retired77777777777777, @UserComeradeAlex, @User592Franklin704, @User:GOAT Bones231012, @User:BlitzPhoenix98, @User:Dddenilson, @User:Balenciagah, @User:Shima808, @User:Ks0108, @User:Mannyhernandezz, @User:Unnamelessness, @User:WhySoSerious?, @User:Madhu Gopal, @User:Hitiste2023, @User:Michele1999, @User:The Sports Gnome, @User:Moscow Connection, @User:Legendofmv, @User:PRRfan
@User:0m9Ep
@User:@ABC paulista, @User:Wolbo, @User:Tennishistory1877, @User:8rz, @User:DiamondIIIXX, @User:Sportsfan77777, @User:JamesAndersoon, @User:Adamtt9, @User:Zyxw, @User:Miijumaaru, @User:Sashona, @User:Gap9551, @User:Japeterson2, @User:Ks0108, and @User:TNNSUH Haddad Maia fan (talk) 13:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not what pinging users is intended for. The best way to get photos is to go to tennis tournaments and make them yourself. I attended a day of the Rosmalen Open the last two years and did just that and uploaded the pictures of all the players I photographed to Commons. Tvx1 14:08, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve found a couple of government pages that allow usage and I can work on getting those up. But I agree with @Tvx1 that attending tournaments is the best way to go. The photo issue isn’t just a problem with tennis though, and we honestly have it a lot better than many other sports. Especially since there are so many smaller/mid size tournaments all around the world that people can go to and take pictures of. Legendofmv (talk) 14:51, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Haddad Maia fan I am really disappointed that a platform like Wikipedia has far fewer images than it deserves (at least when it comes to tennis) considering that so many people use it. I have mostly waited for images to be posted by some users who have been known to post good images in the past (like si.robi and Hameltion) but I don’t expect them to be obligated to post all the time (and what they have done so far is too much).
I am sorry that there is no cooperation between the tournaments / ATP / WTA and Wikipedia to provide at least some images. Or that e.g. WTA and ATP and ITF have images on their websites that could be used on Wikipedia with a certain license. I do not expect images to exist for every possible tournament and that every tennis player should have a handful of images, but unfortunately some do not have any.
Also, I expected pictures to happen at least in some situations, like when Marketa Vondrousova and Barbora Krejcikova won Wimbledon, I didn’t find a single picture of them holding the trophy or in some other variant that would be interesting to put on a Wikipedia page. JamesAndersoon (talk) 18:39, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

True, that’s why I mentioned the government run pages which often have photos that can be used on Wikipedia. I also believe that many Olympic committees can have good photos as well, but I’m not sure about it. I think this is a topic that should be better tackled as I consider the photos to be a key part of the articles and in my view is really bad to have articles with only old photos or none at all, however I don’t know how we could do that Haddad Maia fan (talk) 19:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve actually spoken to some photographers, and one of the big issues is the licensing requirements for Wikipedia. They don’t want their photos to be used commercially by other people, and it does make some sense, since equipment, etc isn’t cheap.
So you have to find people that are A, willing and able to take halfway decent photos at tennis events, B, know that uploading photos to help improve tennis Wikipedia is even a thing that exists, and C, willing to “sacrifice” their photos for the sake of encyclopedic development.
All of that needs to be done before we can even get to uploading and using the photos and at that point you only get a handful of photos. So it’s a difficult process and I also don’t really know how exactly we can solve that problem. The only thing I can think of is perhaps put out a notice on some forum or something, but there’s no guarantee that would even work.
To a certain extent, I don’t think the issue will ever be fully solved since it’s not just a tennis thing. As I’ve said, tennis actually has it pretty good compared to other sports out there. We just have to keep trying and doing our thing and hopefully we’ll get somewhere, at least. Legendofmv (talk) 06:31, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This mainly comes from my time in the motorsports area of Wikipedia but if someone’s page lacks photos entirely, using YouTube to find videos labelled with creative commons can sometimes be the way to go! That’s kind of the only way I know to find more photos though, especially since a lot of the tennis ones are relatively high quality in comparison to the pages you can find for other sports. QWisps (talk) 06:53, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not every creative commons license is compatible with Wikimedia‘s free content. Tvx1 09:06, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

True but Wikimedia Commons has information on which ones are compatible with their TOS anyways. QWisps (talk) 09:30, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering that as we already have articles for the Billie Jean King Cup and David Cup teams, wouldn’t it be also the time for creating articles on the United Cup teams? We already had some editions of the tournament and many teams have played on two or more of them. What are your thoughts on this? Haddad Maia fan (talk) 22:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those teams are far more important and notable, with a long history, so I would not create yearly teams for this minor event. However, the Hopman Cup is a bigger event than United Cup and what we do is United States at the Hopman Cup. The United Cup could be done the same way perhaps, but I can’t see doing more than that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting… So I think I will start a draft on this same format and then I will share it here so you can help too Haddad Maia fan (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just don’t think it is really good to merge the Hopman Cup and the United Cup on the same article, because the article’s title only mentions the Hopman cup and we have some countries that participated at the United Cup and not the Hopman Cup or the other way around as well Haddad Maia fan (talk) 00:27, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No… never merge them. I said we could create an article in the same way we created Hopman Cup, not merge them. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:13, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I said merge to refer to the way that it is right now, because if you go to the article you mentioned, you will see that it talks about both tournaments but the title mentions only the Hopman Cup Haddad Maia fan (talk) 07:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The article on the US team you linked to also includes their United Cup results. Tvx1 08:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:Brazil at the United Cup Haddad Maia fan (talk) 00:40, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would only be relevant to make articles for teams if they have made it a significant way into one of the events. I also believe it would be best to wait until we have ran the event at least five times, considering similar tennis team events such as the ATP Cup (the predecessor to the United Cup) don’t have articles for teams. QWisps (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

True this. It really could go the way of the dodo so perhaps waiting is the best choice here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:15, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that the article Tennis in the United States is largely outdated and there is a notice about a possible need of rewriting the article as a whole. I don’t know how this could be resolved, so I thought it would be helpful to reach out to you for ideas Haddad Maia fan (talk) 10:50, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say “priority” instead of “importance”. This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower Huddle • Handiwerk 19:51, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)[reply]

There appears to be a trend of prematurely creating tennis season articles without first establishing whether the subject will ultimately be notable. Recent examples include the pages for 2026 Aryna Sabalenka tennis season, 2026 Iga Świątek tennis season, and 2026 Elena Rybakina tennis season, all of which have been moved to draft space. This practice disregards the WP:TOOSOON guideline and the specific WP:TENNISSEASON criteria. Rather than serving an encyclopedic purpose, these creations seem to be a form of fandom—made for the sake of having them, without a proper assessment of future notability. Unnamelessness (talk) 15:51, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same on the ATP side: 2026 Jannik Sinner tennis season, 2026 Carlos Alcaraz tennis season. Unnamelessness (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that either those editors don’t get the real idea behind creating those articles or they create them because they think those are top ranked players and for that reason they will always have an article about each and every season they play in, which is far from the truth Haddad Maia fan (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mannyhernandezz: Please stop creating pages over or even copied from a draft, as you have done so to 2026 Aryna Sabalenka tennis season and 2026 Coco Gauff tennis season. Either of the articles could establish their notabilities and currently fails WP:TENNISSEASON, which ends up in AFDs. Unnamelessness (talk) 04:16, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the infobox of the article Queen’s Club Championship, it is stated that the tournament has held a women’s singles and doubles competition only once, in 2025. However, the main body of the article notes that the last time women’s matches were held at the Queen’s Club Championships before 2025, was in 1973. This creates a clear inconsistency: if women’s events took place in 1973, 2025 cannot be considered the first occurrence as indicated in the infobox. Could someone clarify which information is correct and, if necessary, adjust the infobox or the article text to ensure consistency? Haddad Maia fan (talk) 13:52, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, there are standalone articles of some editions of the tournament prior to 2025 that clearly show that they had women’s matches being played Haddad Maia fan (talk) 16:50, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The women’s edition was clearly incorrect and had been removed. Also, generally we list the edition number of the tournament as such and do not distinguish between men’s and women’s edition.–Wolbo (talk) 19:40, 26 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Throughout the whole of 2026, Women in red is focusing on women in sport. This provides opportunities for creating biographies of notable women in a wide variety of sports, including tennis. If you are not already a member of Women in Red, feel free to join up under “New registrations” here.–Ipigott (talk) 10:12, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Svetlana Kuznetsova has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I really like adding old drawsheets because I feel like I am filling an easy gap to fill in the records but every time I do the page gets taken down, this has happened with this page: Draft:2009 Città di Caltanissetta – Doubles and this one Draft:1966 Australian Championships – Men’s doubles even though they are a one to one match of the subsequent years pages. I really wanted to add that Ciita drawsheet too as it’s the last one necessary to complete 2009. Is there an editor higher in the tennis project who can either approve these pages and future drawsheets I may publish or at least tell me what exactly I am doing wrong? Regards, Hiyouboots (talk) 03:18, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hiyouboots: Sometimes it just depends on whom you get to review. But you needed some inline citations for the lead section. That shows it’s notability. I added them and changed the wording to more fully represent the event in question. Thanks for doing this and I added it to main space. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:06, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. I plan to continue adding drawsheets. I will try to include more inline citations but if it is rejected how should I proceed? Should I just reach out to you again? Hiyouboots (talk) 10:34, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the time when a draft is rejected, the editor who rejected gives the reason why it was rejected, so you can always make sure on what needs to be improved Haddad Maia fan (talk) 12:00, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately many newer draws lack the proper inline citations. There are plenty out there, the creator of the article just didn’t use them. If you look at 1939 Australian Championships – Men’s doubles it has seven sources including the external links. That’s more of what should be strived for. The draws for the four majors are actually high on our project’s priority list per our Grand Slam Project. There is just so much new stuff that those get lost in the shuffle. But yeah… bring it here if it gets rejected and we’ll spiff it up. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Inspired by discussions around low-visibility talk pages in other WikiProjects, I would like to suggest a small test section here aimed at assisting with low-traffic or lesser-known tennis-related articles.

The idea would be to create a space where editors can ask for help with articles that may be overlooked due to limited visibility — such as pages on lower-ranked players, junior or ITF-level tournaments, historical events, or articles that do not regularly attract experienced editors. Requests could include asking for second opinions on proposed changes, help with sourcing, notability assessment, structure, statistics, or general copy-editing.

This would not replace existing processes, but rather complement them by giving editors a focused place to seek attention for articles that might otherwise struggle to improve. If implemented, the section could be archived and recreated as needed, depending on length and activity, to keep it manageable.

If there is interest, I’m happy to help maintain the section during a trial period. Feedback on whether this would be useful for WikiProject Tennis is very welcome. Haddad Maia fan (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, the Russian and Belarusian flags have reappeared in tournament draws presented by Google. Have the ATP/WTA/ITF made any changes in this regard? Sira Aspera (talk) 18:03, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, this is only a Google thing Haddad Maia fan (talk) 18:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It was a glitch on Google, it is fixed now, back to no flags. Sashona (talk) 06:10, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please add reliable sources. I also note that dozens of tennis articles remain unsourced. Bearian (talk) 16:32, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that as well and already suggested we should create a permanent section here for people to point out those articles Haddad Maia fan (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I searched for sources on this specific article you requested, but it only appeared some news about the golf tournament of same name Haddad Maia fan (talk) 14:14, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve proposed merging this into 1988 in tennis. If you agree, just do it. If you disagree, please discuss. Bearian (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello WikiProject Tennis editors,

I am seeking guidance regarding the notability and potential eligibility for a Wikipedia article about Ignacio Parisca, a professional tennis player.

Ignacio has competed in ATP Challenger events and holds an official ATP singles ranking. He has also received coverage from independent tennis media outlets (links can be provided upon request).

As I have a professional connection to the player, I understand the conflict-of-interest guidelines and do not intend to create the article myself. I would appreciate any feedback on whether his career meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria for professional tennis players, and what additional sourcing would be required for independent editors to consider drafting an article.

Thank you for your time and guidance.

Kind regards,
Wikiproposal2026 (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Tennis WikiProject’s guidelines for notability would suggest that he currently does not meets the required standard, as he hasn’t made an ATP Tour main draw or won a Challenger title. I would advise focussing on his tennis career instead of trying to get a Wikipedia article created. Iffy★Chat — 16:58, 29 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone,

I would like to ask whether there is someone here responsible for overseeing tennis-related pages. I have been actively working on improving these pages for several years, in line with existing rules. However, over time it has become clear that certain elements require updates, which usually involves discussion and agreement around potential changes. In the past, my contributions were generally well received, and I consistently tried to build constructive, professional collaboration with others involved.

That said, whenever I raise a question or propose an improvement (for example, here), I often receive no feedback at all, or responses only from a single user whose behavior I find difficult to work with. I understand that person’s position, but it is hard to believe that all responsibility rests with one individual. There should be others involved so that collaboration does not feel centralized or personal. I am fully open to accepting suggestions or criticism; the challenge arises when I notice uneven application of rules—where I receive warnings for certain changes, while similar situations are handled more leniently with other users. More importantly, I have observed that consensus is sometimes reached unilaterally, based on personal preference rather than collective agreement.

A recent example is the Jason Kubler page, where I updated a table format that has been discussed for years as needing improvement. I had previously shared proposals—both here and elsewhere—on how the table could be redesigned, but received no response. After my change was reverted, I did not attempt to reapply it. Nevertheless, I was warned based on unrelated disputes from the past, even though this situation had no connection to them.

Over the years, my consistent goal has been to improve tables and overall quality. Disagreements naturally arise, especially when opinions differ, but my intention here is not to argue with anyone. I genuinely want to understand how this process is meant to work and who is responsible.

If our shared objective is to make these pages as good as possible, cooperation is essential. Unfortunately, this user does not provide that level of collaboration, which is disappointing. While the content itself may not be compromised, the approach and communication are, in my view, unprofessional. What discourages me the most is not criticism, but the lack of constructive engagement and the ongoing difficulty, over many years, of reaching other administrators who could help facilitate balanced discussion and resolution—for me and for others as well.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. JamesAndersoon (talk) 12:11, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top