User talk:Asmazif

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Hello! Asmazif, you are invited to join other new editors at the Wikipedia Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on wiki where you can ask questions about editing and receive support & help from experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Sarah (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Tennis

--Wolbo (talk) 11:20, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Asmazif. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by -- Trevj (talk) 15:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Talkback

Why do you keep adding peacock terms and insist on "The Fog" nickname on lead paragraph? It is NOT encyclopedic style. I like Fabio also, but this is not a fan page. Oprah999 (talk) 16:17, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, no-one had a problem with it being there for over a year until he reached the semis of a masters haha... but sure, I see the point. I am a massive fan - it's just an affectionate nickname used a great deal on MTF (you probably are aware of this) and youtube. I like seeing it there :) but sure, if it does bother you wiki standards wise, then i won't put it back up :( Asmazif 18:17, 23 April 2013 (GMT)

On a side note, why exactly did you consider the reference inappropriate? it's better than nothing, it's proof the match happened, the stage, the tournament and shows the ease of scoreline? Asmazif 18:22, 23 April 2013 (GMT)

Hello! Yes, I love Fabio! When he wasn't playing as well, he was still entertaining to watch, and so handsome! When he and Simone Bolelli played together, it was just the most good looking pair of tennis players ever! And who can forget that match at the French Open, against a frustrated Albert Montanes? But now that Fabio is *FINALLY* beginning to get great results, it's important that he receives a good, professional quality article (without too much amateurish sillyness) so that people will respect him and take him seriously. I'm sure Signor Fognini will appreciate it. Oprah999 (talk) 01:08, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Asmazif. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox tennis biography.
Message added 11:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wolbo (talk) 11:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback: 15 September 2012

Hello, Asmazif. You have new messages at Fyunck(click)'s talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:10, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Pre-Open Era Draws

The problem with the infoboxes is that often they contain information that aren't mentioned in the article and are of so high level importance than they need other than a link to the actual tournament to verify them. Nowdays it's fine just to link them because all the tourneys are well documented within their own pages, but just check the early draw pages (20s, 30s, 40s, 50s) : none of them have a proper source, if they have any. If they have a weblink than it is already dead. Or some of the few cases they have a rare book as reference that noone can doublecheck it. So maybe it feels like the infobox is flooded but since it's the only place where you can find rankings/achievements/titles/WL/retirement and other data it is very advised to have them well-referenced until these information got introduced to the prose section. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 14:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at e.g. Béla von Kehrling. How do we know he had won 312 title by the end of 1931? There's no reliable webbpage that tracks down amateur era titles without missing one or two. Because the newspaper reference says it based on an interview, so this is how that option could be filled out. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 14:53, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I do see your point, but perhaps a particular reference needs to only be quoted/displayed once in an infobox, e.g. refs 2 + 3 on Christian Boussus, either that or if one reference is used many times, have it listed under 'Sources' or even think about having it as an external link? As for von Kehrling, it's virtually impossible for him to actually have 312 tennis titles, especially seeing as he also competed in table tennis, football and various winter sports. Perhaps the interview/newspaper ref refers to overall titles in all sports, which would still be a stretch even then? It would also be highly unlikely that all these titles were recognised official tennis tournaments at the time anyway. Would it be more realistic to go by either Tennis Archives or in this case, leave the titles field blank, at least for the moment? Asmazif (talk) 12:10, 19 September 2012 (GMT)

Although I put Tennisarchives at the bottom of each player page it is an unreliable site as well (it has forum-like contribution mechanism - e.g. they included the 1930 Hungarian International Tennis Championships after I'v created it here in Wikipedia so it contradicts WP:CIRCULAR and WP:SELF, moreover most of the entries don't have sources). External links are not references they are just the "further reading"s of websites so it's not the proper way for referencing. References are either formatted by direct reflinks or refnotes to sources that redirects to references. Both method requires the appropriate refnotes next to the sentente that they verify. You can't just put 10 refnotes at the end of a paragraph forcing one to look every ref if he/she wants to justify a statement somewhere in the midst of that paragraph. I've done many DYKs and Good article nominations and that was the requirement that was demanded each time. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 18:56, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

so following on from von Kehrling's titles, any chance you could translate what this pdf/source states? I just find it incredibly hard to believe, no official set of tournaments aside, that it would even be possible to win 312 titles... This would mean he won a tennis tournament every 2 weeks for his entire career, in the midst of playing 4 or 5 other sports to a competitive level - basically inconceivable. Do you not feel the same, that this number is either unreliable or simply misleading? Asmazif (talk) 10:30, 21 September 2012 (GMT)

As for Kehrling it isn't the editors task to valuate the claims of a source. Also it isn't impossible to clinch 312 title in a 22-year span career. He was a nobleman who had nothing else to do but to compete in various sports, travel and write about it for his journal. And in the amateur tour all of his opponents were just the same, businessmen, nobles, officials, high ranked soldiers not all pros. And don't imagine these matches as a classic Djokovic - Federer encounter. These people were middle-aged men doing sport as a hobby. E.g. my cousin plays tennis, football, swims and rides a motorbike, if he'd been born in the 30s he would have been already competing in official non-professional tournaments of all these sports and probalby win some of it. And Kehrling was quite skillful in tennis compared to the other amateurs as he beat Cochet and professional player Tilden just to name a few. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 09:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Although I agree with you that it could happen that the 312 titles include consolidation tournaments, invitational cups, national championships and other sort of tennis competitions that are out of fashion today. Still I don't think we should sort it out just because the tennis of today don't acknowledge them as the tennis of his time surely did. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 09:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, I misread his career starting year as 1920. Still, an insane feat. And sure, I can see it's almost the equivalent of me winning my local club 8-man draw tournament in my rural town. How long has this source been made available? I'm surprised he's not mentioned/namedropped more in terms of tennis history/sheer numbers or statistics...

On a side note, if a source defies logic, it is the editor's task to valuate the claims of the source - there's no way you'd consider putting the reference and titles down if the number claimed to be, say, 270,385 ;) Anyway, thanks for your time, sorry to press. Asmazif (talk) 10:49, 21 September 2012 (GMT)

It's okay, I'm sorry if I sounded so professorish...I just really dag through those 1929-1932 newspapers I cite so often and I'm quite convinced they are high level sport magazine of their time, that's all. To further convince you - and as you requested - I translated the paragraph of Tennisz & Golf; IV/3 (1932_4_003) pp. 42. So here it goes:

A tenniszben a nagy eredményeket a nemzetközi sikerek jelentik. Ilyenekben ezentúl bőven van részünk, hiszen a Szövetség csaknem az egész művelt világ minden országával összeköttetésbe lép. A közeli és távoli kontinentális országokon túl Anglia, India, Japán, Argentína, Amerika csapatával és Ausztrália hölgycsapatával mérkőzünk. Kehrling 1929-ben ismételten legyőzi Austint, Anglia jelenlegi éljátékosát, a világranglista második helyezettjét, Magyarország csapata pedig a Davis Cup európai zónájának elődöntőjébe jut. Kehrling ragyogó eredménysorozatából a kimagaslókat sincs itt helyünk részletezni, de talán eleget mondunk azzal is, hogy a mai napig Kehrling Béla 312 bajnoki. 69 egyéb első, összesen 661 versenydíjat nyert.

In tennis the big feats are the international victories. We had been part of those lately as our [Hungarian Tennis] Association established contact with all the countries of the civilized world. Apart from the the closer and farest continental countries we compete in team competition against the teams of England, Japan, India, United States, Argentine and against the ladies' team of Australia. Kehrling beat Bunny Austin again in 1929, the top player of England and the second best in the world, while Hungary reaches the semifinal of the Davis Cup. We don't have enough space to get into details with Kehrling's outstanding results, but maybe it could be measured the best by counting his titles to this day, which is 312 championships titles, 69 other first place, 661 overall.

I corrected the copy-paste character errors caused by the pdf format in the original text so this way you can copy it to Google translator and double-check it if you wish. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 10:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the translation. I have a feeling that Kehrling will become some sort of cult hero in tennis fandom at somepoint! Asmazif (talk) 11:20, 21 September 2012 (GMT)

changes to infobox tennis

this change is inconsistent with this change due to the omission of "result" for WightmanCup. also, I am assuming you are going to change all the articles? or are there no articles to change? Frietjes (talk) 22:04, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

They've only recently been added (by someone else) - hopefully there is very little (if anything) to change. And yes, thanks for pointing that out, that was obviously just a typo - have fixed. Asmazif 23:11, 23 October 2012 (GMT)

non-final scorelines

The consensus is no scores in prose but certainly allowed in tables. If you look at Roger Federer's career statistics page there are bunches of scores... but they are in tables. There are always exceptions like with scores that set some sort of record or perhaps if it's the most important match of a player's career, and then no tiebreaks scores are used. But simply tagging sentence with (a) or (b) and then listing the score in a notes section would seem to be bypassing consensus. Obviously if it's an article on a specific tournament the final score with the winner will be listed in prose in the lead paragraph but you get the picture. Also quite often the reference included with the sentence will link you to the original web article, which will have the score in greater detail. Now, does wikipedia have tennis articles on players with scores in prose?... you bet it does...tons of them. But they are slowly being replaced with the scores removed, and it's a slow tedious process that not many want to do. I hope that helps. We have a guideline section at tennis project that can help with many queries. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the response. In terms of Fognini, it was merely his 2011 RG match v Montanes I would query, which is definitely the defining match of his career. This whole process is surely going to be incredibly frustrating for editors, as you'll get people adding the latest match scorelines into articles ALL THE TIME. But yes, makes sense - I've recently removed scorelines from a couple of small articles of 1970s/80s players, so eventually...Asmazif (talk) 11:05, 19 February 2013 (GMT)

We do get the latest scoreline problems as you said, but wiki is not a news blog. But I also find that once an article is score-free in prose that new editors do notice that and simply copy the style of the previous matches. If every article had simply one score only in prose I'm sure no one would have complained about it detracting from articles in the first place... but that's not what happens. Scores beget more scores and soon an article looks like Kim Clijsters which we haven't gotten around to fixing yet. Too much detail is another big problem We don't want or need blow by blow details of every match. Most tournament draws are listed here already and a link to it could tell you who they played and what round they lost in. So often it's better to say they played in a blah blah tournament and lost to so and so in the third round. Every player they played is overkill for an encyclopedia, which is supposed to be a summary of information with a link to a detailed newspaper article if need be. Like I said there's thousands of players here so it takes time. I occasionally add something myself that gets reverted and when I check the guidelines or talk page I see that I was in error. Right now my main interest is fixing sores and removing improper flag icons from cities and tournaments. Fyunck(click) (talk) 11:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Heinrich Kleinschroth, Asmazif!

Wikipedia editor Pjposullivan just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Extremely well-crafted article. A pleasure to see and promptly check off on the page curator! Thanks for your edits.

To reply, leave a comment on Pjposullivan's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.