Talk:The Four Musketeers (tennis)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Error?
[edit]I believe the statement about the French championships only being open to French nationals until 1925 is incorrect. They were only open to members of French tennis clubs, which is not quite the same thing; and indeed the Briton H. Briggs, being such a member, won in 1891, defeating P. Baigneres.
One Fassit (given name unknown) was runner-up the next year, and F. Wardan in 1897. See:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?menuId=47&menuItemId=6144&view=DISPLAYCONTENT&grid=A1&targetRule= http://scoreboards.canoe.ca/merge/tsnform.aspx?c=canoe&page=tennis-m/stat/french-winners-men.htm
Paul Magnussen (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Merge
[edit]Rather than having two stub articles "The Four Musketeers" could be inserted into the France Davis Cup team as a subsection. Since they were the ones who won those Cup titles that are listed in the pic of the latter article, the text from here would be a great description to it. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 12:57, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- I would keep this article as a stand-alone. All my life I have read in tennis books about the Four Musketeers. They were introduced at all the tennis functions as the Four Musketeers for as long as they lived and it is such an integral part of tennis history and legend that it would be a shame not to have an article on it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- I am also more hesitant about merging this one. It doesn't really fit well in the Davis Cup team article, because obviously they did more than just play Davis Cup for France. There are exceptions to everything, and this just seems to have a rich history and lasting fame. MakeSense64 (talk) 09:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- And what about the forged New Musketeers part? It's sole reference - the only one who uses the term - is Davis Cup News itself. What about that one to be merged into Davis Cup? These people have nothing in common apart from having the same nationality and being in the top 50 , which directly leads us to the Davis Cup, which enlists people based upon the said two factors. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 10:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- That new Musketeers could easily be edited out as it was simply a light drizzle as opposed to a downpour. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, I think we need to distinguish between wordplay (which is done all the time by journalists), and terms that get picked up and become commonly used over many years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MakeSense64 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 29 February 2012
- That new Musketeers could easily be edited out as it was simply a light drizzle as opposed to a downpour. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- And what about the forged New Musketeers part? It's sole reference - the only one who uses the term - is Davis Cup News itself. What about that one to be merged into Davis Cup? These people have nothing in common apart from having the same nationality and being in the top 50 , which directly leads us to the Davis Cup, which enlists people based upon the said two factors. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 10:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- I am also more hesitant about merging this one. It doesn't really fit well in the Davis Cup team article, because obviously they did more than just play Davis Cup for France. There are exceptions to everything, and this just seems to have a rich history and lasting fame. MakeSense64 (talk) 09:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)