Talk:German Open (WTA)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to support move. JPG-GR (talk) 06:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I moved this article from "German Open (tennis)" to "Qatar Telecom German Open" to ensure consistent naming of articles relating to this women's tennis tournament, including the year-specific articles such as "2007 Qatar Telecom German Open". I specifically requested that any move back of this article be discussed first. However, Rst20xx reversed the move without discussion and said in his edit summary, "Please discuss such moves, instead of engaging in provocative behaviour". He also posted an incivil message on my discussion page, ridiculously accusing me of stalking him and "making edits you know I clearly am going to oppose" in violation of WP:OWN.

The fact of the matter is that this tennis tournament is now officially known as the "Qatar Telecom German Open" and Wikipedia, because it is an encyclopedia, should reflect that undeniable fact. Tennis expert (talk) 05:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

This is a blatant fabrication of the sequence of events. Look back through the move history of this page, as well as 2007 German Open (tennis), 2008 German Open (tennis), 2007 German Open - Singles, 2008 German Open - Singles and 2008 German Open - Doubles. As you will see, there was a mixture in the location of the pages, some being at "German Open" and some being at "Qatar Telecom German Open". Hence, I moved the pages which were at "Qatar Telecom German Open" to be at "German Open" or "German Open (tennis)" (as appropriate). I thought these moves would be uncontroversial, as having sponsorship names in tennis articles is far from standard practise. Now, this occurred whilst there is a debate between Tennis expert and others (myself included) happening over at WP:Tennis along broadly similar lines (though not to do with this specifically). Hence, my accusing him of stalking me; he looked at my contributions, saw the moves, undid them, and made a couple of other changes while he was at it that I didn't even make in the first place. I then undid the moves myself and requested him to discuss it here. I don't see how what I did violates WP:OWN, it's the fact that Tennis expert was making these moves when he must have known that I'd oppose them if they were made unilaterally that I was objecting to, which violates the procedure at WP:RM.

Anyway, I refuse to discuss how this vote came to be any further as I've had my say, and I hope people will vote for what they think would be best, not because of how this vote came to be - rst20xx (talk) 14:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

The "fabrications" (and assumptions) are all yours. Take responsibility for them. And your utter failure to WP:AGF, not only here but in your incivility on my discussion page, is breathtaking. By the way, this is not a vote. See WP:POLLS. Tennis expert (talk) 19:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Rst20xx's move of this article from "Qatar Telecom German Open" to "German Open (tennis)" was contrary to the clear consensus for naming Wikipedia's articles concerning women's tennis tournaments. He moved the article in violation of that consensus, and his allegation that "having sponsorship names in tennis articles is far from standard practise" is false. The consensus is that Wikipedia articles concerning those tournaments include the sponsor's name. See, for example, the following articles: List of women's tennis tournaments, Toray Pan Pacific Open, (a Tier I event), Family Circle Cup (a Tier I event), Kremlin Cup (a Tier I event), Qatar Total Open (a Tier I event), Open Gaz de France, ASB Classic, Abierto Mexicano Telcel, Acura Classic, Advanta Championships Philadelphia, Ameritech Cup Chicago, Bank of the West Classic, Barcelona Kia, Bausch & Lomb Championships, Bell Challenge, Boodles Challenge, Cachantún Cup, Commonwealth Bank Tennis Classic, DFS Classic, Dreamland Egypt Classic, ECM Prague Open, Fortis Championships Luxembourg, Gaz de France Stars, Generali Ladies Linz, Grand Prix SAR La Princesse Lalla Meryem, Hansol Korea Open Tennis Championships, JB Group Classic, J&S Cup, Lion's Cup, Mondial Australian Women's Hardcourts, Moorilla Hobart International, Ordina Open, Pilot Pen Tennis, Porsche Tennis Grand Prix, PTT Bangkok Open, Sunfeast Open, Toyota Princess Cup, 2008 Bank of the West Classic, 2008 Banka Koper Slovenia Open, Regions Morgan Keegan Championships and the Cellular South Cup, Virginia Slims of Albuquerque, Virginia Slims of Nashville, 2008 East West Bank Classic, 2007 East West Bank Classic, 2008 Family Circle Cup, 2007 Family Circle Cup, 2008 Family Circle Cup - Doubles, 2008 Family Circle Cup - Singles, 2007 Family Circle Cup - Doubles, 2007 Family Circle Cup - Singles, 2007 Kremlin Cup, 2008 Medibank International, 2008 Medibank International - Women's Doubles, 2008 Medibank International - Women's Singles, 2008 Qatar Total Open, 2008 Qatar Total Open - Singles, 2008 Qatar Total Open - Doubles, 2008 Nordea Nordic Light Open, 2007 Nordea Nordic Light Open, 2008 Nordea Nordic Light Open - Singles, 2008 Nordea Nordic Light Open - Doubles, Proximus Diamond Games, 2007 Proximus Diamond Games, 2008 Proximus Diamond Games, 2008 Proximus Diamond Games - Singles, 2008 Proximus Diamond Games - Doubles, 2007 Toray Pan Pacific Open, 2008 Open Gaz de France, 2008 Open Gaz de France - Doubles, 2008 Open Gaz de France - Singles, 2007 Open Gaz de France, 2007 Mirage Cup. Tennis expert (talk) 05:32, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Let me point out that there are hundreds of tennis tournaments. Most can be found in Category:ATP Tour and Category:WTA Tour. The fact that you pulled out 33 (and bizarrely their associated year and draw articles), many of which have no clear non-sponsor name, does not demonstrate that the sponsor name position is common - rst20xx (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

(1) More false and unconstructive statements from Rst20xx. There are not "hundreds" of women's tennis tournaments. Exaggeration gets us no where fast. (2) Every article I cited above (and there are many more of them) is a separate article, including the draw articles like 2008 Family Circle Cup - Singles. Therefore, every article I cited counts as part of the preexisting Wikipedia consensus that RST20xx so blatantly and bizarrely ignored. (3) I have no idea what he means by "many of which have no clear non-sponsor name". There is "no clear non-sponsor name" for the Qatar Telecom German Open, which is the subject of this very discussion. Tennis expert (talk) 06:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Booting up AutoWikiBrowser and filtering out the individual events (e.g. 2008 German Open (tennis) and 2008 German Open - Singles), leaving just the tournaments (e.g. German Open (tennis)), tells me that there are in fact 98. So OK, not hundreds, but a 2 to 1 majority. And German Open does have a clear non-sponsored name, look at the history of the sponsored names, here. Anyway, this is going in circles, so I will say no more on the matter - rst20xx (talk) 15:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course you would filter out the individual event articles on Wikipedia, i.e., ignore them, because they do not support your position. That's part of your strategy here. But those articles are part of Wikipedia consensus just like any other article. Tennis expert (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay then, I know I said I wouldn't reply any more, but let's do this once more, and then this is truly it from me: To include the individual tourney/event articles, you list 66 sponsored ones above. There are 1605 articles of this type in total, or excluding the Grand Slams, 433. 66/433 = 1 in 6.5 - rst20xx (talk) 23:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

As I said before, I made no attempt to list them all. That's what "See, for example" means. The fact remains that you moved these articles without bothering to obtain consensus ahead of time. And when you were reverted, you moved them a second time and provided unconstructive and borderline incivil edit summaries (plus the incivil post on my talk page). I'm sure you've heard of WP:BRD. But you forgot step 3, namely "discuss". Tennis expert (talk) 07:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Votes

• Oppose. The official name is not important unless it's also the common name. Just because Qatar Telecom bought naming rights doesn't mean we have to use it as an article title. German Open is more consistent over time, more likely to be searched for, and is used by Reuters, the BBC, the N.Y. Times, AFP, and Xinhua. It's also consistent with German Open (badminton) and German Open (snooker), which do not use their current sponsored names as article titles. Station1 (talk) 06:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

News media that use "Qatar Telecom German Open", for example: Washington Post, Xinhua, TimesOnline (London), Associated Press, Gulf Times (Doha), Yahoo Sports, Sky Sports, Tennis Week, USA Today, FOX Sports, CBS Sports, NBC Sports, Tennismag.com (Australia), On The Baseline, ESPN, IOL (South Africa), Tennis-X.com. Tennis expert (talk) 08:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Last time you cited a list of websites using sponsorship names, I cited every single one of them back to you using non-sponsorship names. We've been through this before Tennis expert, and I'm not going to do it again - rst20xx (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

With the exception of Xinhua (which uses both forms), Tennis Week, and Gulf Times, these all appear to be schedules or lists of various types, not articles - fwiw. Station1 (talk) 03:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

So, what's the point? Schedules or lists are published according to each news media outlet's style guide just like articles. Tennis expert (talk) 06:07, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

A minor point. But I give more weight to a news article written by a professional reporter and reviewed by one or more editors at the NY Times than to a press release reposted on On The Baseline or something off the wires on YahooSports. Station1 (talk) 00:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

• Strong oppose. This is merely a sponsorship deal. It's a classic case of one of the reasons Wikipedia:naming conventions doesn't give much weight to official names. News sources do seem to use official names, this seems to be the convention (and I've some theories as to why they do this but perhaps now is not the time to describe them). That doesn't mean that other English speakers will follow this convention. Andrewa (talk) 13:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose per above reasons - rst20xx (talk) 14:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

It's curious logic to request any reversion should be discussed, and to then unilaterally move the article. Controversial moves should of course be listed at WP:RM. To do a unilateral move in the hope that there will then be no consensus to revert it, and that as a result a move that would have failed to get consensus if listed would succeed would be gaming the system, and I think we should take a dim view of it. But hopefully that's not what was intended here. And of course in any case it wouldn't be any excuse for other infringements of behavioral guidelines alleged above. All a bit disappointing. Andrewa (talk) 13:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Look at the move histories and discussion pages of 2007 German Open (tennis), 2008 German Open (tennis), 2007 German Open - Singles, 2008 German Open - Singles, and 2008 German Open - Doubles. You'll see that Rst20xx moved all of them without prior notice and without prior discussion when any reasonable person would have know that those moves had controversy written all over them, especially for someone like Rst20xx who has been involved in the WP:RM process in the past. When I moved them back and requested discussion of any third moves, Rst20xx just moved them back to what he, alone, wanted and left unconstructive, uncooperative, and borderline incivil edit summaries scattered all about (and an incivil message on my discussion page). It was only after I reversed Rst20xx's initial moves that I noticed this particular article had inconsistent naming versus the other Qatar Telecom German Open articles. That's why I moved it (and it alone). Tennis expert (talk) 19:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree that the edit summaries Please discuss such moves, instead of engaging in provocative behaviour and Moving it in line with the other articles; please initiate the discussion yourself if you disagree weren't ideal, but I think there's fault on both sides frankly. It was developing into a classic edit war, and I do give you credit for bringing it here rather than continuing with it. Andrewa (talk) 03:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.