Talk:List of Wimbledon singles finalists during the Open Era

Tennis High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to tennis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TennisWikipedia:WikiProject TennisTemplate:WikiProject Tennistennis

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tennis To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Cleanup : Take an item off the Cleanup listing
Copyedit : Roger Federer, Leander Paes, Rafael Nadal, Justine Henin – to be used as examples for ideal page structures
Expand : Grab a Start article and expand it, or peruse the List of articles.
Photo : Add photos to Tennis or Tennis people articles
Stubs : Bring a Stub up to our standards.
Other : *Sign up as a member of the project.
Tag more articles with our standard project template.
Help with the creation of yearly main articles and drawsheets for every Open Era ATP and WTA tournament.

Four time finalist or more

Must be mentioned in lead and have a picture in the article, if it is a bonafide free image.69.137.120.81 (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What a bunch of bunk !

"List of Wimbledon singles finalists"

Should be a list of who played whom in what year, and what the score was.

This title "List of Wimbledon singles finalists" is incorrect, inappropriate, and aggravating. Whoever created this article clearly does not know what a list is.

A list shows all of the details, year-by-year, and a LIST is not a mere summary, which is what this article is. It is truly aggravating, because it does not answer such questions as "Who did Jimmy Connors play in the Men's Finals in 1974, and what was the score?", or "Who did Chris Evert play in the Women's Finals in 1976 and what was the score?"

Before writing it, some thought should be devoted to the question of, "What should the article of the title of the article, and could it be misleading and aggravating?" 98.67.170.121 (talk) 20:44, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I am truly sorry you feel this way about this article, but if you want to know the full information go to List of Wimbledon gentlemen's singles champions or List of Wimbledon ladies' singles champions. This article is not about scores it is about the finalists and the years the make them, mulitple time two finalists played each other and consecutive finalists at the events, which you are sadly mistaken on the premises of these articles to begin with. I was not the one that created them, but if you would want to further talk about this, I am more than open to doing so. I try to make tennis articles better on here, but I guess there's always a little more room for some improvement. Have a nice day!BLUE _DOG^TN 21:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can agree on putting who they played in the tables, but scores are overkill for this article because you can go to the drawsheets to find out or the two list I mentioned above!BLUE _DOG^TN 21:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone's a bit keen...

The 2013 final is still in play - Murray hasn't won yet, although he's two sets up.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Wimbledon singles finalists during the open era. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100428050843/http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/about/history/rolls/ladiesroll.html to http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/about/history/rolls/ladiesroll.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:11, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Wimbledon singles finalists during the open era. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Singles finalists during the Open Era - Chart Order

We have charts for quite awhile that list our Wimbledon gentlemen's and ladies singles finalists during the Open Era. They have always been player first as that is the single most important aspect. We could shorten the country names (but it's a little more confusing for older computers) but the names of the players should really come first. It's what our readers would expect to see first and foremost, not a separate column with a country. The player, the nationality, the records. It's a little different when a single column contains both flag and player name, but that is tougher to sort. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:02, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion was already had at Talk:List of Australian Open singles finalists during the Open Era, with 2-1 consensus for the new format which aligns the finalists articles with the four WP:FEATURED champions articles, e.g. List of Grand Slam men's singles champions. Letcord (talk) 10:02, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2-1 is not consensus... plus one of the editors pretty much dropped out of the conversation. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is, and they didn't drop out, they just expressed their opinion and moved on. They asked for the changes so it's obvious where their opinion lies. Letcord (talk) 02:07, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

People change their minds, especially once it was not going to be the standard way we do things with simply adding the flag icon statement before the name. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:11, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion lasted only a couple of days, and if they had changed their mind they would/could have said so. Letcord (talk) 02:31, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We simply have a difference of opinion on this as did the administrator who chimed in and said it wasn't really a consensus. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:39, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's quite clear actually. I don't blame the admin for not wasting their time fully understanding the discussions & your disruption, as there were quite a few diffs to inspect. Letcord (talk) 02:43, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There you go again lying about who was disruptive. Knock it off. Keep things to the subject and leave me and you attacks on my talk page alone! Goodness. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not lying. I'm sorry that the truth about your actions is hard to swallow, but that's not my problem. The subject matter here was already discussed on the Aus Open talk page, with consensus reached for the changes. Any further discussion should be held there, to keep things centralized. Letcord (talk) 03:03, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be looking for it here to see if it ever gains a consensus. Otherwise this article could be locked for a long while. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I'm sure you will, as it allows you to avoid accepting the consensus on the other talk page, or face your own words: Of course if no one else chimes in that's a different story for an article or two. As I said on the admin noticeboard you just ignore consensus when you disagree with it, while preaching kumbaya in your replies. Behavior not befitting of an editor who uses his supposed "experience" as a weapon in disputes. Letcord (talk) 07:42, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Say whatever floats your boat. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]