Talk:Aravane Rezaï

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Black coloring[edit]

In the tournament she won against Marion Bartoli is black background, hard to read, why use this color?

RGDS Alexmcfire 19:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Wrong facts[edit]

I'm sure she lost to Dementieva at the ASB Classic, and made it to the Semi Final, not the final


In 2008, she lost to Davenport in the final. In 2009, she lost to Dementieva in the semifinal.

Also--technically, I think Bali was not on "hard" court but rather on "carpet". It certainly wasn't a hardcourt in the sense of those in the US Open series or the Plexicushion of the Australian Open series. During the Bali final the announcers referred to the surface as "boards", implying that it was wood, with some type of mat or carpet over top of it. It was definitely much faster than typical hard courts.



WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 02:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Requested Move[edit]

Aravane RezaiAravane Rezaï

The diacritic in this article was removed after discussion at WikiProject Tennis. Following this move and several others, a further discussion took place at WP:Requested moves/Tennis and it was determined that diacritics in tennis biographies would be kept. A quick search shows that most of the tennis biographies affected have been fixed, in accordance with the close of the discussion, but I think this is one that just got missed. Several English sources confirm the ï as opposed to the i, including the NY Times, Yahoo Sports News, Europe Media Monitor, Wikimedia Commons, etc. The diacritic provides a useful clue to the pronunciation of her name and is accurate. Maedin\talk 18:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I performed the original move and stand by it, however...there is no resolution on this issue, and it should be probably be moved back for consistency's sake. You may want to note that the editors who write the tournament articles week-in-week-out e.g. 2008 Kremlin Cup have opted out of using them, so there are essentially two concurrent, contradictory policies on this issue. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 00:34, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I realise that a lot of regular editors don't use them—they are fiddly and it isn't easy to remember to use them or on whose names to use them, so that's fine. But what's so cool is that this is a collaboration—I know which names need them, and I know the shortcuts for the diacritics or have them on my keyboard, which is why (when I have time) I update articles to reflect correct diacritics. Not everyone is going to care or be as interested, so it's ok that linked names go without diacritics for a while (what are redirects for, afer all?). The only problem is when people take the "corrections" personally. In the first tennis discussion I linked to, there was support for their removal from an editor who didn't want to use diacritics because they made him/her feel "delinquent" for not knowing how to make them. If ignorance was a reason to not do things on Wikipedia, then all of this would be whittled down to common knowledge and little else. What are encylopaedias for if not to learn? If a specific practice isn't one's thing (like diacritics), one should allow someone else to fill in the gap (which is the point), instead of preventing Wikipedia (and the Tennis project) from advancing. Just my two pence on the situation!  :-) Maedin\talk 07:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
I used to feel this way, and fixed pages appropriately; now I'm moderately against them on the English Wikipedia. I try not to assign too much importance to them; the consensus, in practice, is to have article pages at the name with the diacritic(s) included (bar one notable exception), so they should all be like that.
I think the decision to keep them out of the tournament articles was taken near to when it seemed that that would be the policy. Oh well. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 11:29, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Since she is French, no need for Farsi transcription of her name[edit]

Referring to [1]. The transcription has no official, administrative validity, and her name could as well be transcribed in Chinese caracters without being less or more relevant to the article. --Insert coins (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

  • I consider your assertion to be racist. The Scythian 01:20, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

How is she not Iranian? She holds dual nationality and has represented Iran in many international tennis tournaments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.5.148 (talk) 00:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

A credible source for that, please. --Insert coins (talk) 06:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
please see this link —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.242.220.149 (talk) 10:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
It says even on this article that she holds dual Iranian and French nationality and has played for Iran. She was born to Iranian parents in France though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.5.148 (talk) 16:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright links[edit]

No matter how you put it, those youtube videos are a copyright violation. You don't have a real grasp of copyright laws and yet you flippantly talk down at another user. Your opinion of public television copyrights (i.e. it being free means that it is free from copyrights), which you place most of your emphasis on when telling me off, is misinformed and the fact that you repeatedly asked me to make a discussion to get other "opinions" sullies your case even more. How can a clear copyright violation be talked away with more opinions? It being "partial" (which it clearly isn't) footage is beside the case. Fixer23 (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure where you have felt the "flippantly talk down" part, that is never the intent. If there has been a "telling me off" in our small communications, it has been from the user who have initiated the changes repeatedly and have not been open to repeated calls for discussion till now. I am happy that you finally started talking instead of simply reverting the edits and being so sure of your correct interpretation of laws.
As mentioned before the case for discussion is not what to do with a copyvio (which we won't have any discussion on it) but whether we indeed have a copyvio here. As of now I haven't seen any supporting document on this except your opinion. While your opinion of the interpretation of law is respected but it doesn't just simply become "THE" correct one without reference.
Please provide your reference (not your opinion or your personal interpretation however sure you 'feel' about it) as why citing partial footage from Iranian public TV is a copyvio. While you might be very very sure of what you think is right, that without proper citation is not valid in WP and the goal of bringing others into discussion is also to find those valid sources or valid WP practices.
I am sure we can find a proper approach to deal with this if we try and not revert to editing back. Farmanesh (talk) 19:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)