User talk:Asmazif

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

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?[edit]

Teahouse logo
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[edit]

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

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages![edit]

WP teahouse logo 3.png
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. 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.


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)

sure, ok :) that Montanes match was something else... I wish someone could/would upload the entire match on youtube - my vid here is pretty much the only thing on there: :( can't wait to see what magic he brings to the French this year (and the rest of the clay season of course)... and yes, loving the Bolelli pairing - working out incredibly well so far this year! Asmazif 10:50, 24 April 2013 (GMT)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
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[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
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[edit]

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:

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[edit]

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[edit]

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![edit]

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.

Standard colors[edit]

Hi Asmazif, noticed you updated a number of player tournament tables. Please ensure you use the correct standard project colors (per Article Guidelines), e.g. the grey color should be #E9E9E9 instead of #dfe2e9. Thx! --Wolbo (talk) 13:23, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

thanks! will do Asmazif (talk) 15:18, 22 June 2013 (GMT)

Template:Infobox tennis biography[edit]

Hi Asmazif, I reverted your recent addition of the Irish Championship field to the Infobox tennis biography. The template instructions state "Please do not make any significant alterations to the template (e.g., new fields, field name changes) without establishing general awareness and approval via the talk page.". Clearly a field addition requires prior discussion and approval and I did not see this proposed and discussed on either the Template talk page of the WP tennis talk page. Please make this proposal on either talk page so we can discuss it and see if it has consensus. Thx.--Wolbo (talk) 16:32, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

sure thing, have done: Template talk:Infobox tennis biography#Irish Championships. Asmazif

Tennis infoboxes[edit]

Tennis Barnstar Hires.png The Tennis Barnstar
For your good work in adding many infoboxes to tennis biographies. Wolbo (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Nice work! Just a small FYI, the fields 'Nickname' and 'Weight' are no longer used in the infobox so it's best to just leave them out. --Wolbo (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! and yes, will bear that in mind :) Asmazif 18:04, 11 February 2014 (GMT)

Alfred vs Ernest[edit]

I've made it a redirect - it's obviously a possible search term as you only found the other article out after creating yours. Always better to redirect than delete - where possible, of course. Peridon (talk) 10:54, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Robby Ginepri[edit]

Very odd - I checked the diffs, and they don't show a missing infobox. I wonder what went wrong... --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

yeh, not sure what happened... there were source errors scattered throughout the page for some reason. I just reapplied the category change you made, so all's good, regardless. Asmazif 21:06, 27 August 2015 (GMT)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Just an fyi[edit]

I was fixing a bunch of timelines today and I saw a bunch of older ones where you made Jr performance timelines... which is against consensus guidelines. We don't do it for jrs. These were all from long ago so far, and for all I know you do none of that anymore and this is a waste of my typing... if so very sorry. I'm just trying to stay on top of things so I don't have to keep removing these things anymore. Thanks much for understanding. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:46, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. yeh I did stop doing them a year or two ago, but didn't know it was against consensus guidelines until now. I'll remove any I come across from now on :) Asmazif 22:19, 16 August 2016 (GMT+1)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Asmazif. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)