Talk:Andy Murray

Calendar year section subtitles

I've trimmed down the heading next to the "2015" section, just because it contained far too much information, and I feel like the headings attached to each section should be brief summaries of the most important events of that particular season, rather than every single notable achievement. In the case of 2015, I felt winning the Davis Cup and finishing as number 2 in the world for the first time ranked above his first clay titles, 500th match win and another runner-up finish at the Australian Open, had he won in Melbourne for instance that would have merited it's own mention in the heading. Thetradge (talk) 2 December 2015, 00:24 (UTC)

Split career section

I have split the long career section into Career of Andy Murray to reduce the size of the article. Thoughts? Goodreg3 (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click) Should you wish to carry out your proposed trimming of trivia, please go ahead and do it so this article can be considerably improved for readers. Little point in not dealing with the situation as I have attempted to do. Take action.

I find it a very bad idea. Plus no discussion agreement. The whole purpose of the article is Murray's career so to move that away seems a poor choice. What it needs is a massive trimming. Several editors have expressed the idea that super bloated articles like Murray, Djokovic, Federer, Williams, etc will need a massive overhaul once the players retire and editors stop adding trivia. They all need to be more like somewhere between Martina Navratilova and Steffi Graf article size. Something readers don't get bogged down reading about. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree the article is overloaded with minor trivia, highlighting basically every movement he made during his career. Let's have a discussion, and reach a consensus, about the best course to take here. Personally, I felt a split of the page would be the best move, and have the most prominent and important elements of his career on the main page. Perhaps I overlooked the importance of a discussion on this matter. However, that said, I hope we can swiftly reach a conclusion and we can improve the article for readers. Goodreg3 (talk) 08:59, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

It would be great if it happened soon... not much happens quickly around here. I was just concerned that moving bloat to a new bloat location is not the way to go. Trouble is there are heaps of watchers on the Big Four and while any are still playing it's tough to do anything without it causing a ruckus. And by the way, the Aberdeen Cup was played twice and was considered an exhibition event. I don't think that qualifies as playing for Scotland. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:15, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I have spoken before about reducing the bloat on these top players of the past 15 years articles. The problem is people often add trivial events/minor wins to these articles when they occur, without any sense of perspective (this is not the case with players before Federer's era such as Sampras, as wikipedia wasn't around during their careers and articles were created after they retired). After all the frenzied editing on pages such as this one over the past decade, I can see the amount of editing vastly slowing down once they are retired. I intend to reduce the bloat on these articles but I am in no rush. If others wish to have a go at doing so before I do, then that just saves me time later on. The less irrelevant bloat the better the article and the more people will read it. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely. I am more than happy to try and reduce the bloating of the article in an attempt to help out. Goodreg3 (talk) 22:20, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

The best way to do something like that is to do it in your sandbox and list it on the talk page here so others can help edit it also until most are satisfied. I'd say everyone satisfied but that will never happen at Wikipedia. Career is the longest on the articles so if that could even be cut by 1/3 to 1/2 it would be great. I'm not even sure where the separate sections for every single yaer came about. We didn't used to do that. It always seemed to me like we would list the titles they won during a season and list who they beat in the four majors. A sentence on injuries, a sentence on records broken, and a sentence or two on anything special. Then move on. We aren't supposed to be writing a book or making things longer than Abraham Lincoln. Perhaps experiment with 5-year chunks instead of single year chunks so editors can have options. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I like individual year sections and this is standard on many pages now. Many pages used to have much too little on them. But these modern great player pages have way too much, for the reasons I outlined. I don't think many would argue to keep a lot of this stuff now, as much of it was added around the time events occured and hindsight brings a different perspective, particularly the perspective after a player retires. I am happy to go along with the sandbox idea, although it seems we have a consensus (so far) to reduce the size of the article. I intend to wait a few more months before starting to edit these articles and I won't touch Djokovic's article until after he retires. Please by all means begin to reduce the article in size if you wish, Goodreg3. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 23:48, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

thank you, I agree with the split. I also did that on 21 June, like it's been done for Nadal, Federer, Messi and Ronaldo as the article was too long. It's now back to being too long again. It is the simplest way to solve the situation, hence why it's done for those other tennis player and sports figures, Tom B (talk) 10:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Those other tennis player splits were reversed long ago, so their bloat was not transferred to another separate bloat page either. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:39, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I agree with fyunck about not splitting articles. The bloat should not be transferred, it should be removed. A career stats article is different from a bloated career narrative article. 88.97.218.225 (talk) 23:55, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

No, Federer has splits including Roger Federer junior years and Roger Federer's early career; there is Serena Williams's early career. All recent major tennis player articles are tagged as too long, too detailed, or sensibly have splits. The simplest way to get below the 15,000 per WP:Size is to remove words e.g. through splitting which all other major tennis articles have done, or deleting, Tom B (talk) 14:12, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Those little mini-splits were done long ago and include all types of separate charts. Serena's charts on her early career page is an incredible pile of bloat meant for a novel. I have no idea how some of them they escaped notice of Tennis Project. And the sections that got filtered have simply grown gigantic again, just like Federer. But to move a players entire career section out of their bio is crazy. It's the main reason the article is here. Do you realize that all the great players of the past would need these same size articles, same yearly splits, same early careers, so that the encyclopedia weight balance is close? That's not what an encyclopedia is for. That's for a book. 18:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)Fyunck(click) (talk)

Scotland - Aberdeen Cup

I have added Scotland to the infobox, as Murray represented Scotland at the Aberdeen Cup twice. This has since been removed. Can we have some consensus here as to whether it should be added or not considering he represented Scotland at a tournament? Goodreg3 (talk) 09:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

It was not a tournament... it was an exhibition... huge difference. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:31, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

That consensus has already been established years ago. He didn‘t represent Scotland. The Aberdeen Cup was an exhibition with informal teams. These weren‘t national teams organized by a national federation. Tvx1 09:19, 4 August 2024 (UTC)