User talk:Fyunck(click)

You know, I've been fortunate in my life to have witnessed Laver and Rosewall walk out onto the court to play each other; to have heard the applause, to have heard dead silence from the crowd as a point was in progress. The years have come and gone as did the antics of Nastase, Connors and McEnroe... the stoic determinations of players like Borg, Evert, and Sampras... and now the space age materials and all-court players such as Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. Between submitting articles to tennis magazines, I've watched the ladies game move from lithe of foot players like King, Goolagong, and Navratilova, to athletic powerhouses, using hi-tech equipment, such as Graf and Williams. Service has changed from having to keep one foot on the ground or just getting the ball in play, to players who can fire a dart that only high speed cameras can behold. The four majors have changed in my lifetime from three grass courts and one clay court, to one grass court, two acrylic courts, and one clay court. The courts have also been changed in the last 20 years to be closer to the same speed; Wimbledon slowed down and the French Open sped up. The balls have also been slowed down and with all those changes the tougher-to-master net game has disappeared but the multi-surface champions have blossomed.

Of course I wasn't there in the 1920's when tennis truly went international and the ILTF wrote into their bylaws that no Major championship could claim to be a "world championship" or that the language of tennis would be "for ever in English", but the repercussions of those early days, and binding together of adversarial organizations, laid the groundwork for what we have today. The sport is special to me and it always will be. As we venture into the unknown of pandemics and crowdless stadiums lets applaud how far we've come since Spencer Gore won the first Wimbledon Championships back in 1877. We'll get through this with flying colors, and not just tennis. We'll mourn our great losses but eventually move on like juggernaut. Tennis looks like it's in good hands with the youngest generation of players ready to grab the brass ring from the seats of their steads, but the legends are still hoping they get some splinters from reaching out too quickly. Cheers.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
32		Neutral Paralympic Athletes at the 2024 Summer Paralympics (talk)	Add sources
423		Sara Errani (talk)	Add sources
424		Rohan Bopanna (talk)	Add sources
167		Karolína Plíšková (talk)	Add sources
282		ATP Tour records (talk)	Add sources
86		Steve Johnson (tennis) (talk)	Add sources
606		Microplastics (talk)	Cleanup
201		Shaun Parkes (talk)	Cleanup
23		Zhou Jihong (talk)	Cleanup
1,207		Don Felder (talk)	Expand
30		Human rights in Algeria (talk)	Expand
19		Jessica Hardy (talk)	Expand
688		Goran Ivanišević (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
376		Jennifer Capriati (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
372		Timeline of HIV/AIDS (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
143		Exotic star (talk)	Merge
20		Savi (talk)	Merge
10		4×4 (disambiguation) (talk)	Merge
7		Charlotte Kerwood (talk)	Wikify
87		John Bentinck, 5th Duke of Portland (talk)	Wikify
14		Ryosuke Irie (talk)	Wikify
147		Emerson Romero (talk)	Orphan
4		Ana Asenjo Garcia (talk)	Orphan
4		Baldo Diodato (talk)	Orphan
55		Siu yeh (talk)	Stub
7		Jerry Heidenreich (talk)	Stub
20		Carolyn Schuler (talk)	Stub
14		Severin Lüthi (talk)	Stub
6		Dolfi Drimer (talk)	Stub
9		Gabriele Rossetti (sport shooter) (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:27, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit as: 1. Team competition=tournament (points are still counted) 2. If you really think 0 is the correct description, please change all the values of United Cup participants (although this will be controversial). Thanks, and sorry for disturbing. Timothytyy (talk) 05:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this really got up my nose. How – just how – is a name like that a "basic word"? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:06, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mac Dreamstate:Usually we would put in a pronunciation for foreign players in this English Wikipedia, not not a simple name like Gauff. We don't put it in for Jimmy Connors or Lindsay Davenport or Jennifer Capriati. We don't put it in for Gauff's mother's last name of Odom. We don't even use it for players like Mary Joe Fernández who was born in Dominican Republic. Sure there can be tricky English names that have several ways to pronounce them, but this really isn't one of them. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Completely disagree. Connors, Davenport and Fernandez are not comparable in the slightest. Gauff is a very unusual name in the English-speaking world. I had no idea if it was /ˈɡaʊf/ or /ˈɡɔːf/, so how are other readers supposed to know, especially those unfamiliar with tennis who happen to stop by? This is absolutely one of those occasions where an IPA is more than warranted. I really think you should reconsider your edit. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mac Dreamstate:Hey you can add it back but I firmly believe it's wrong and will say so on the talk page. You are also going to need a reliable source that specifically says how it should be pronounced otherwise you can't add it back. There are times we need a pronunciation guide for tricky names and this is not one of them. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page—no problem, if we need to go that route. I'll get input from Help talk:IPA/English as well. As far as sourcing goes, it doesn't get more reliable than herself. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I can't stop you from adding it back. I won't get into some revert war. How she speaks it and how people hear it can be two different things. Iga Swiatek has pronounced her name online... in her last name some people hear two syllables and some (like me) hear three syllables. How Gauff pronounces it I've never heard another way to pronounce it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"How Gauff pronounces it I've never heard another way to pronounce it." – And if a reader unfamiliar with her has never heard it? I guarantee you, nobody in the UK would have the faintest idea if they don't follow tennis. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which is exactly what I said. I've never heard another way to pronounce Gauff, whether it's Coco Gauff, Gauff Hill, Pennsylvania, or Gauff-Roth House. And per Ancestry.com the Gauff family name was found in USA, UK, and Canada all the way back in the early 1800s, so I don't believe your statement about the inability of UK residents to know how to pronounce it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We're still not quite 'clicking' on this point. Until she become popular, I had never heard that name. Without a doubt I'm not the only one, and you may be overestimating UK residents' linguistic abilities—you should've heard some of the abysmal attempts to pronounce anything German at my high school. Being a UK native, I could only think of /ˈɡaʊf/. So why should readers be left to guess? That's the whole point of the template, to inform readers unfamiliar with the subject or those with hearing impairments. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about French people not knowing if Brad Gilbert has a silent "t" at the end of his name? Should we start adding a guide on how to pronounce Gilbert? There are some names that are really tricky and can be mangled badly. Coco Gauff ("Goff") is really not one of them. Perhaps it could be put in her early life prose section but I see no reason to do it even there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"What about French people" – This is the English WP, catering mainly to English readers. If the French have issues with Gilbert on their WP, it's of no interest to me. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We obviously will not convince each other. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] – Thought you said you weren't going to edit war over it? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you changing in all the players performance timelines section from Open to Masters for Indian Wells and Cincinnati. These tournaments are well known as Masters. This is another instance when changes are NOT agreed on and are totally NOT necessary. Please bring it to the Wiki Project page before making changes in bulk. Sashona. 23:11, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The tournament names were changed here at wikipedia... and not by me. The official names of the events are "Open" not Masters. Do you have some vendetta against me or something? Move on to something else. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean “That is not there name or link?” It is there, they are Masters, when you click it goes to the page. There is no need to make these changes. Sashona (talk) 23:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The links are to Indian Wells Open and Cincinnati Open, not Masters. The articles were changed to reflect the tournaments minus sponsors and they are dual events with the ladies. This happens all the time in tennis. Why the big deal here? The Canadian Open and Miami Open are also men's Masters level events. I'm at a loss as to what the issue is. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are known as Masters, why are the changes needed , the links are working fine. You are making not necessary changes, unless you can point me to have a Wikipedia directive that requires to make all these changes. Sashona (talk) 23:29, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No they are not... the women have no masters events and these events serve a dual purpose. Their official names have no term "Masters." Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:31, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are changing Men’s player pages, please move on, stop making unnecessary changes. Sashona (talk) 23:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are changes to be consistent with our articles and for our readers. I update when I find them. Move along please. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a place when it says we have to change these? I can bring it up otherwise in Wiki Projects as a massive change that needs to be made on all players profiles. Sashona (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the way wikipedia works and you should know that by now. If all you want to do is complain about everything I do with no merit, please post somewhere else other than here. If you want to discuss ways to make articles better that's cool. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:40, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So it is a unilateral, only your decision to go ahead and change these. I am not complaining, I am just pointing out how uneccessary these changes are unless they are required. Sashona (talk) 23:43, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was a unilateral change by someone who changed those two tournament names from Masters to Opens. Seemed like a great idea with great reasoning plus the events themselves use the term "Open.". Once that happened I have slowly updated our charts to help with that change so the links would match. Sometimes links don't match in charts with small spaces and lengthy tournament names, so we do our best. In this case though it actually makes the row shorter so it worked out well. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am all for making better articles but sometimes it is more useful to concentrate on more important, needed or mandatory changes then this, like removing the Russian / Belarusian flags, that was a great and necessary improvement I thought. We are talking about a lot of pages, but if you have the time that is great. Sashona (talk) 00:26, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I look at them as similar, but minor for sure. But I'm not changing 1000 articles at once. As I see them I do a couple fixes. Usually they pop up on my watchlist and I do a cursory check to see if they are updated or they are against some consensus. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of French Open broadcasters, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of French Open broadcasters until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I hope it's ok that I copied your text and also notified Talk:Unified Team at the 1992 Winter Olympics as it would probably also affect this article. Miria~01 (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that she grew up in and was raised in Delray Beach, Florida, she was actually born in Atlanta, Georgia. Not only has she stated this but there are numerous articles that also support this. What to know about Coco Gauff's mom, dad and siblings - ABC News (go.com) [https://www.bing.com/search? Atlanta-born Coco Gauff wins U.S. Open, secures first Grand Slam title (yahoo.com) 131.156.156.50 (talk) 01:17, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I used that ABC source and added it to prose in the article and changed back the infobox. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there,

I have noticed that you have been adding references to Top 10 wins sections of various tennis players using WP:PRIT. While, it does a good enough job, I would like to suggest that you should try using WP:REFTOOLS. Speaking from personal experience, I find RefToolbar to be way more easier and a lot of faster because you can cite a reference within just three clicks. Also, Proveit sometimes do not mention the author/journalist who wrote the article used as the reference.

I hope you will try and will find this suggestion useful. Cheers! PrinceofPunjab^TALK 12:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrinceofPunjab: I've used Proveit for years but I'll certainly take a look at REFTOOLS if it's that much easier. I always thought you had to use it with wikieditor. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrinceofPunjab: So I tried it and it worked pretty much identically to Proveit, except Proveit automatically puts in the access date. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but both open a box to fill in the stuff I want. Proveit automatically uses cite web, which I use 90% of the time. RefTools I have to click on the pulldown template every time. Both have boxes for copying and pasting from the website so that's identical but the three main boxes I use are url, title, and publisher, and they are one after the other vertically in Proveit, while in Reftools they are side to side and smaller. I'm sure you get used to anything but vertically larger boxes are faster for me. I copy and paste the url, copy and paste the article title (but often have to change it to sentence case instead of caps), and then add the publisher. Both have spaces for author but I just usually skip it as overkill. I've actually had editors go back and remove the journalist name and other attributes I added as unneeded.

The thing that takes the longest is finding the good source in google that isn't a blog or video. Once I find the source for Proveit it's click the add citation button, copy paste, copy paste, copy paste, and then insert. With Reftools it was click the add citation button, pulldown the template choice, copy paste, copy paste, copy paste, click add access date, and then insert. At least that's how it worked for me. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fyunck(click) I don't know id you tried it or not, in RefTools you do not have to copy and paste title and publisher, You just need to copy paste the url in the url box and then click on the magnifying glass 🔎. The system will automatically fill in the aurthor, publisher, title and the publishing date. On the topic of finding sources, I have sort of the opposite problem. Whenever I tried to search the source I always get multiple Indian news sources (because I live in India), but I tries to find more international sources because I do not want the reference to filled with just Indian news sites. I hope ypu will try the 🔎 option and find it useful. Cheers! PrinceofPunjab^TALK 04:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrinceofPunjab: Now that's interesting. I do have to add the extra step of the citeweb pulldown, but it autofills the title and website name. Ive gotten pretty fast with those three copy and pastes in ProveIt, but if I do it enough I think it likely that simply pasting the URL and clicking the Mglass would be faster still. I tried it a couple times and it works, though one time it filled in the website name in all caps that I had to fix. Thanks for this info. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrinceofPunjab: I find I'm using your suggestion of Reftools more than Proveit now. It works pretty well. Once it inserted nothing and once it inserted too much, but the rest of the time it was url/title/websitename just like I usually do. Thanks again. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:18, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing Surface Table Bar now? LOL. Seriously, there's NO NEED to be SO clean and minimalistic this way, you're inadvertently make info more confusing and less instructive to tennis fans and users 186.26.98.32 (talk) 08:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's called trivia and undue weight. Tennis Project rarely uses surface tables for these low level events. And when there is only a couple of events it's already in the table. Remember the surface table columns are sortable for that very reason. This is an encyclopedia, not a book and the subject. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you have A LOT work to do here - Tennis profiles have many 'errors' based on these strict rules 186.26.98.32 (talk) 09:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's endless as new articles and tables get created as fast as the team can fix them all. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So put your heart on this ;) You see problem in my edits, there's a guy who does A LOT of mess with German players profiles - he replaced many infos I added about Jan Lennard Struff, for example 45.183.133.82 (talk) 20:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like most of what you added to that player was wrong. They are ATP 250 ATP 500 and ATP 1000... not ATP Tour 250. We rarely need nowrap. Not sure why we need singles in doubles in a legend if it's already under singles or doubles headers. If they only played futures that's all we use for a heading, if they only played WTT that's all we use as a heading. If they played both we use both. As for font size we always strive for 100% unless the player played many many years. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He abuses with 'nowrap' - so you're okay with that but not my edits? Smh And 'ATP 250 Series'/'ATP 500 Series' It's what I used lately 45.183.133.82 (talk) 22:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need "series". The universal events are WTA 500 and ATP 500.... WTA 1000 and ATP 1000. To be honest nowrap seems to be a personal thing. I don't belive the tennis project has a standing on that aspect except for the performance timelines. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's ugly and turns tennis players profiles chaotic instead of cohesive. You sure have a lot of problem with my "excessive and unnecessary infos" but ignore other profiles "aesthetic choices" smh 45.183.133.82 (talk) 22:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I edit Jan Lennard Struff profile with your "New rules". Let's see If you find "An error" now LOL 45.183.133.82 (talk) 23:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Getting a little tired of your whining. You can find a lot of info at our project page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennis. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good - I hope you sendo these guidelines to all editors here, especially to the "nowrap aficionado" 45.183.133.82 (talk) 01:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if all you did was add or remove unwraps, I wouldnt have noticed or cared. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait the other guy mess with the new edition - aligned with these rules you presented - I did in Jan-Lennard Struff profile. I hope you leave a comment dissuading him too when it happens 45.183.133.82 (talk) 05:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your guy, BundesBerti, removed info from Jan-Lennard Struff profile again, in his Challenger and Futures section - including 'nowrap' unnecessary editions. Will you send a harsh comment to him? You NEED to be fair on this 45.183.133.82 (talk) 13:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your guy, BundesBerti, removed info from Jan-Lennard Struff profile again, in his Challenger and Futures section - including 'nowrap' unnecessary editions. Will you send a harsh comment to him? You NEED to be fair on this 45.183.133.82 (talk) 12:36, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop with the "my guy" stuff. I told you nowrap is sort of a non-issue in most instances. Everything else was refining what I already fixed. It looks great. I even refined the ITF stuff more. What you were doing was adding stuff over and over that was fixed. When there are no ITF events you have them in the legend. And he is correct that when the entire section is about Challenger level events we dont need a Challenger tier in the table. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed 'nowrap' from 'your guy' editions ;) And you said adding '(singles)' and '(doubles)' was unnecessary - but here you are adding on João Fonseca profile, right after criticizing me for doing the same - you're hypocrite and don't even follow your own rules LOL 45.183.133.225 (talk) 21:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know if I'm talking to the same person since you are too lazy to sign up for an account and your IP keeps changing. You're about to be banished from my talk page if you don't start behaving. Stop with the "your guy" crap. I didn't add anything, I reverted all your mistakes en masse, and the doubles singles stuff was part of it. If you add only good things then all is well. If you make mistakes then there are issues. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Either you and Wikipedia community set an ultimate and universal pattern to ALL tennis players profiles or I'll doing new editions who I feel apropriate. It's arbitrary and chaotic anyway. Oh, and you firstly removed my'(singles)' and '(doubles)' from Legend Bar I added on João Fonseca profile - but now re-added them as your own idea - so yes, you're hypocrite 45.183.133.108 (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then you and all your clones stay off of my talk page. I'm done with your attacks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, please point me in the direction of the discussion/vote where consensus was established or to the standard/template format to follow when it comes to recording Challenger and ITF Futures/WTT results for ATP players in separate sections instead of combined (as it has been done for years now on wikipedia). Separating them makes the pages longer for no reason, not to mention it seems excessive/unnecessary to separate them out since they are considered minor leagues to the ATP Tour and had for years on wikipedia been recorded together in the same tables for singles and doubles. Why the change now? TNNSUH (talk) 01:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TNNSUH: We were never supposed to tally both ITF and Challenger events together. This has been discussed but I'd have to search where. They always used to be separate but I would agree that for some reason they have more recently often been combined. That's very sloppy for the minor league and the minor/minor league. It like when i find editors totaling Davis Cup and Olympic w/l in the performance charts. I think what happened is that in the past we did not have win loss record of 5-7 in a column. And I'm not saying they have to be in separate charts, that's what i found easier to make the correction of tallying the two together. What could also be done is keep them under the same Challenger and ITF header and keep them in the same table.. but put all the Challenger events first in date order and then all the ITF events in date order. The Challenger events would tally as 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, 3-1... and then the ITF events would start their own tally of 1-0, 1-1, 1-2, 2-2 etc... I see no issue with that if you prefer. That would keep things under one header. What I think is messy is having one table with all entries by date, thus creating scattered Challenger and ITF events. Then the tallying column might be 1-0, 1-1, 1-2, 1-0, 1-1, 1-3... that's what we should try to avoid for our readers. The only thing that's not acceptable is totaling the wins and losses from two different levels of competition as if they were the same. They even have two different governing bodies. If you want to make it in the same table I have no issues with that. I don't think we have a standard but I remember having this conversation a couple times before. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you said about keeping them in the same table but listing the futures/wtt results first by date and w/l then the challengers next (by date and w/l as well). I think until some sort of consensus is established on the wiki project, it is best to list them in the same table but separate in a level sense so that readers can see the players record in each level of tournament instead of how they currently are (mixed together by date and disregarding level). TNNSUH (talk) 21:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the fact the they originally were in separate tables and laziness started putting them in the same table I'm not sure everyone would agree, but same table but separate sections can work for me. I would list Challengers first as we do main tour first. That way it moves down the page by importance. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fyunck, can you assist me with cleaning up Iga's career stat page. I will add scope, you can expand the deprecated tags, then we can open a discussion on the project's talk page about the charts. After all has been said and done, I plan on nominating the article for good article or Class A at least to serve as an example for career statistics articles. What do you say? Qwerty284651 (talk) 01:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take care of valign and align please? Qwerty284651 (talk) 07:31, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the edit conflict earlier. Was using regex and most of the hex codes were missing #, namely ffffcc, CCCCFF, 98FB98, FFCCCC, ffa07a, afeeee, efefef, ffebcd, e9e9e9, d4f1c5. Qwerty284651 (talk) 08:53, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you reverted vertical-align back to valign. The latter is deprecated.

@Qwerty284651: LOL... I do a lot in Open Office with find all and replace and forgot to include the # also. It was all white and I knew I blew it. What's tough is the actual code is supposed to be style="background:#fcfcfc;" but it's really hard to find and replace that way when you start with bgcolor=fcfcfc. You can't just replace bgcolor= with the really proper html. style=background:#fcfcfc will work when there is only one attribute but proper html says to use the semicolon and encase it in " ". And when you get a color like "Lime" there is no # so that's an issue too. I didn't mean to change the vertical-align... I reverted the chart back to it's proper visual form and that got caught in the revert. Sorry. Time for sleep for me. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One can always have a custom template for the regex for the SF, F and W, the only 3 using actual words and the semicolon is unnecessary. Also ## -> # to resolve duplicates. Pretty much it can be done with 3 replacements. I forgot about # too. Hence why everything was white. 😅 Qwerty284651 (talk) 09:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When taught, the semicolon should be included. It will work fine at wikipedia without it, but then again it will work fine without the parenthesis also. I think there are other word colors in different charts but I could be mistaken. I wonder if there is a bot that will do the fixing for us? Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I mentioned, the SF, F and W colors: yellow, thistle, lime. Qwerty284651 (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But I know I also run into LightBlue for W25 tournaments and I think there could be one more. But yeah, if you fix the colors first then it goes smoother. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I modified Iga's top 10 section to pass MOS:COLHEAD and added sticky headers for easier navigation on mobile. Give me your thoughts. {{Top10 key}} is intended to go to the top or bottom of the top 10 wins chart? I narrowed to 75% for a better fit on mobile. Qwerty284651 (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where the top 10 key goes is of minor concern to me. I created it because of discussions at Swiatek's and Sabalenka's 2024 seasons and that we needed a key. It worked well for those so I started making sure to add it to the bottom of all the standard charts. Whether it goes on top is a matter of aesthetics. It looks better on the bottom and I think most readers will understand it without the key, but it's there for those who require it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651:What table attribute decides how long is the visible part of the scrollable table? Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The original height is 75vh or 75% of the screen's size. An example set to 50% of screen's height. The attribute in question is the div scroll above the table: <div class="sticky-header-scroll" max-height:50%>. This percentage for how much of the table is displayed is subjective and up for debate. I personally prefer 50%. Qwerty284651 (talk) 21:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651:I'm fiddling with it and no matter what percent I use it's always the same height on my monitor. I'd rather it be a static number rather than a percentage. I'll keep fiddling. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have a big screen. Try it on your phone in mobile view. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:08, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651:Even changing the window size does nothing. It looks like per this article max-height will not work. I never do editing on a phone, and rarely use my phone for any extensive wiki research. My thoughts were to try an limit the table to the first 10 or 15 entries so that every player would be identical. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you changing the max-height in the scroll div or the table? You change the scrolling in the div wrapper not the table. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Took a second gander at the code. You use 50vh not em for max-height. My bad. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651:The only thing I see is div class="sticky-header-scroll" max-height:50% and changing it to 20% or 75% makes zero difference in Chrome. I don't see any other max-height used on the entire article. It must only work on mobile. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Set the table's width and height to 300em, you'll see what I mean. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iga_%C5%9Awi%C4%85tek_career_statistics&diff=1226482521&oldid=1226481879 Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:35, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I restored sticky row headers for horizontal scrolling and the sort name for the players you accidentally removed. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:27, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651:I think I see what you did. However one thing I am not accidentally doing is removing the sort from round which has little value, and stopping the non-standard centering. Those need to go! If you were actually looking at wikipedia recommendations, numbers are best sorted to the right but lest looks cleaner, while centering looks poor. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:39, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The number alignment can be toggled.

This is the param in question, you've been struggling with: https://prnt.sc/q-yikU6hog33. With wide screen it is barely noticeable. Better example with a larger table. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of changing table height/width to see the effects of sticky rows/column headers, what can be easily seen on mobile, all you have to do is zoom in. It's that simple as I recently found out by experimenting. Qwerty284651 (talk) 23:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest thing I was looking at was the number of rows shown on the screen under normal circumstances. You changing it to 50vh was exactly what I was looking for. It comes out to about 12-13 rows on my monitor screen. Then you can scroll down the rest of the way to 39. It doesn't overwhelm the article yet shows enough for most to be happy with. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With this simple div scroll with the vh parameter modifier (see vh related discussion), you can shorten an article list without removing any chart data. List of slam records article is my primary target for this, but will open a separate discussion because some charts can be limited to 3+ or 4+ titles followed by a scrolling table. Other lists in these articles aren't in that poor shape, except the no. 1 week and slam winners for all 5 disciplines (first tables/charts in all of them: 4 for weeks and 5 for slams, 9 articles) would need severe truncating followed by MAYBE...a table resorter to change the order from ascending to descending, because it would conceal the latest winners, one would have to scroll all the way to the bottom....it would be a major change, but that's something to be opened on the project's talk page...maybe on a smaller scale in the aforementioned articles' talk pages...This is something fairly new, I have been experimenting with. TBD. Qwerty284651 (talk) 00:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Side note: For div scroll all you need is {{<div style="height/width: in em, pt, %, vh, whatever>}} and , max-/min- in max-height is optional for limiting the effects of the scroll-container in the table (example + code). ..the templatedate for covid19 you added is for sticky rows-tending to the mobile users moreso than pc ones (more details here). Unless, your intention was to have sticky row headers (col 1 or 2) in which case ignore this comment. Qwerty284651 (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been testing main tourn. categories navboxes (atp and wta 500 and 250 navbox versions (1990-present) and the olympics champions) for a potential merger and I need your input on whether these would benefit the community better if they are centralized on 1 page, similar to wta 1000. Qwerty284651 (talk) 23:24, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651:It can be done but here's what I'm really not fond of. When I'm on a WTA players page and I click on the navbox, right at the top front and center I want to see the WTA chart, not the ATP chart. When I'm on an ATP players page when I click on the navbox, I want the ATP chart right at the top front and center. 99% of the time we only want the navbox that concerns that player. Example of the ATP 500s. For Alcaraz why on earth would we put any navigation to anything but ATP 500 events? International Gold events happened over 16 years ago and you can count those players on two hands. Same with WTA 500 but since it is so recent I might include the WTA Premier. I guess I like having the navbar that only matters to that player. Also, me probably thinking of the sexes, having the WTA always below the ATP in everything we create is a little squirrely. I could be in the minority on this so plop it on the project talk page and see if others agree with you... everyone but me just might. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Donald Trump on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LOL... no chance I would touch that page with a 11 1/2 foot pole. It is so lopsided in it's viewpoints as to be one of the most unusable articles at Wikipedia. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fyunck, can you create a 1988 in tennis, similar to 2021 in tennis, and link it in the subsection you added? Thanks. Qwerty284651 (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerty284651: Done It's done 1988 in tennis. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Thank a lot. Qwerty284651 (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You had a few redirect stragglers, I bypassed. You can place the following code in your common.css page to highlight redirects. Qwerty284651 (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did it very quickly and didn't notice. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get people who jump on someone else's edit and leave a snotty remark like you just did on my Reilly Opelka ones. First of all no-one else could be bothered to do the work I did and secondly who made you the rules of Wikipedia arbiter? Try being nice it'll make you feel so much better. Have a great day. Shrug02 (talk) 20:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shrug02: Really??? Jumped on and snotty???? You have to be kidding. My summary said "no scoring in prose unless it's a record." Those are Wikiproject Tennis rules. It's why I left it. I was nice and to the point. I removed the scores and replaced it with number of sets just like other project members do. You've only been here three months so that would be a standard summary to inform you not to use scoring in prose in normal circumstances. I adjusted some paragraphs and fixed some event names. Otherwise I have no idea what side of bed you fell out of today. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you undo this split? You yourself said at Talk:Rafael Nadal that the page was too long. WP:SIZESPLIT says articles with over 15,000 words "Almost certainly should be divided or trimmed", and Rafael Nadal has nearly 23,000 words. Are you going to remove a third of the article instead of splitting it? Un assiolo (talk) 23:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Un assiolo: I did not undo it, someone else did, though I do agree with it. And absolutely yes... it needs to be trimmed by a third not take all the trivial bloat and put it somewhere else. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I re-nested the reply so others can actually read it.... it was crushing up against the right end of my monitor"

I was having trouble reading that even before you did that. Much appreciated mon ami. 178.120.23.165 (talk) 12:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well I just realised that I can't read the whole thing. But then again I'm on mobile. At least it helped somewhat. I guess this goes on to show how long the thread has become eh? 178.120.23.165 (talk) 12:21, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please @Fyunck(click) if you don't want to reply, delete this section. I can't do this myself, the filter thinks reverting my own edits is harmful somehow. 178.120.22.29 (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are not supposed to remove replies. I only moved it because I thought others would have issues reading it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know why you did it. Hence my comments above. As for removing, you can blank your own talkpage (yeah the whole thing, except for blocks), it's up to you. At least on the English Wikipedia. I do find it funny that I can't revert my own edits here lol. But I mean yeah Fyunck if you wanna keep this here that's fine too. 178.120.22.29 (talk) 17:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The comments you made on my user talk page make me unhappy and seem to violate some of the guidelines in the title. (Why?)Please stop doing this and make civilized comments. ZeehanLin (talk) 17:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZeehanLin:Just trying to help out to make sure you stick around. I won't make that mistake again. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have pointed out other people's mistakes in a sarcastic way before. You possibly violated some of the guidelines in the title, and not for the first time. It is hard for me to believe that you can become a pending changes reviewer with such an attitude. If you still behave like this, I will request to have your permission banned if possible. ZeehanLin (talk) 18:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Well, you probably already knew no good deed goes unpunished, Fyunck. ZeehanLin, it's highly unlikely that a request from you to have any of Fyunck's permissions removed for trying to advise you will have the result you wish. You are mistaken in thinking they have violated any guidelines. Bishonen | tålk 19:05, 30 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

So why? ZeehanLin (talk) 19:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's backwards logic. You are supposed to say what you think Fuynck has done wrong. Not expect other people to say how Fyunck has done nothing wrong. Bishonen | tålk 19:45, 30 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

"You are supposed to say what you think Fuynck has done wrong."--I gave a link saying "Why?" in here but it looks like you didn't even read it. ZeehanLin (talk) 04:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you don’t read it, let me reiterate it:

1. ...creating Draft:Taiwan which has no chance of being implemented... [2]
   Many of you have already preconceived that my changes are wrong and ultimately unworkable. Many of you are not seeking the truth, but are trying to exclude "intrusions" from people like me, whether reasonable or unreasonable. I have always taken this matter seriously, and I have looked for sources to maintain neutrality as much as possible, but you think this is a kind of "sabotage".
   Violating WP:GOODFAITH, WP:CIVIL and WP:NPOV.
2. Great... based on a wildly speculative blog.[3]
   You have pointed out other people's mistakes in a sarcastic way before, which was violating WP:CIVIL.

ZeehanLin (talk) 04:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The given evidence does not support the aspersions cast. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to think that, then think that.I didn't actually make a ruling, report, or request a ban. But I was angry at his behavior. ZeehanLin (talk) 15:39, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You cast the WP:Aspersions, that means that you are required to either provide sufficient support for your aspersions or retract them. Failure to appropriatly support ot retract is a WP:NPA violation. You are not in a situation to request a ban or anything like that, the only one in such jeopardy is you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:46, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I just realized I was too arbitrary, I used "seem to" at the beginning but not at the end. I should have used it throughout, I always thought it was like this. ZeehanLin (talk) 16:14, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry again.

Also, I found some wiki policies that we didn't mention before. Maybe it's time to get down to business. I want to know if there is a loophole in my comment. ZeehanLin (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZeehanLin:Look, too many times I see editors get into trouble here, self included. If I came in a bit too brisk I'm sorry. You stated you are new at this and you were on the edge of trouble in February. I saw the same slide towards it again in the fact you are editing one particular topic, have been reverted by someone else, and starting to go in circles on the talk page. We just had an editor blocked fishing in similar waters. You also said you have only an intermediate grasp of English. You were given no formal warnings, only nudges as a reminder since the China topics can be quite sensitive. Take them as you will and I wish you well. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)(ec) If the best ZeehanLin has is Fyunck(click) pointing out something that mentioned a blog (and 5 months ago at that) and not liking Fyunck(click)'s polite advice, well, I'm closer to seeing ZeehanLin's comments as personal attacks that I am to seeing Fyunck(click)'s edits as a problem. There is no guideline violation here, and no need to remove privileges. ZeehanLin is free to ignore the advice. Meters (talk) 20:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what I wanted to avoid... I didn't want ZeehanLin to stand out in a negative way. I wanted him to pull back the reins a bit and really read what others are saying rather than replying to every sentence. To be bold in their additions but only do it once. If that works and a year from now we see a very productive editor on multiple topics, and the only damage is some complaints on my talk page now, I can live with that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certainly not suggesting that anything needs to be done about it. It's just another bit of advice for ZeehanLin. Meters (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Meters:Advice he doesn't seem to be heeding at all looking at the Mainland China article. Oh well, I can't say I didn't try. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:42, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. I'm not responding further to that editor. It does not seem to be doing anything other than making them dig deeper. Meters (talk) 07:46, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the mainland China article, I think we can have a little misunderstanding. I thought my mistake was to impose TAC's views on the Chinese government, so I modified the subject (grammar) of these sentences and resubmitted. ZeehanLin (talk) 12:12, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Meters,Please read my accusation carefully before seeing ZeehanLin's comments as personal attacks ZeehanLin (talk) 04:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		Hey, stranger; long time, no see! I see you've had some run-ins lately with another editor whom I won't mention but perceives himself to be a sports expert. I've had plenty of unpleasant interactions with him in the past for his incessant bullying, non-stop reversions, and excessive spamming of bullcrap templates all over my timeline. Good for you for standing up for yourself! Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've been told that by a couple others. He/she will likely wind up breaking big rocks into small rocks soon enough in wiki-prison. I hope not but it is moving in that direction. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you left a cease & desist on their talk page, which they promptly removed. Any future posts to your talk page, any bullshit templates, whatever - except for the required ANI notice - constitute harassment and you can take it straight to ANI. Someone needs to learn something about cordiality. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:22, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know what I can do... I always hate to do it. I'd rather editors work with each other rather than bringing to ANi. He's reverted so many articles now, and multiple times, he could be brought there and likely blocked. But he also does great work in helping Olympic and some other sports articles. And blocking just sets his anger in stone. I'd rather give him every chance to see the light. We'll see. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: I see someone else has decided they can't take him anymore and brought up a complaint against him. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I saw. It is a long-time coming, although I doubt anything will come of it. He has monkeyed around with figure skating articles in the past with the same BS excuses. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Grand Slam (tennis), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Morocco and Talk:2024 United States presidential election on "Society, sports, and culture" request for comments, and at Talk:Imane Khelif on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Martin Van Buren on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Notability on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please give a warning to this [4] user. He's messing many tennis profiles 45.183.132.243 (talk) 18:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comment above, thanks 45.183.132.243 (talk) 20:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@45.183.132.243: I see no real issue. It looks more like a content dispute between you two. What exact edits are the big concern? When I look at Mirra Andreeva I see a change from Junior Grand Slam finals to Junior Grand Slam tournament finals... the latter is correct. I see a change from Singles: 1 (1 runner-up) to Singles: 1 (runner-up). I'm not sure what difference that makes. If theres only one singles final and it's a runner-up finish do we need to say (1 runner-up)? For the section header, we want it short (the two or three biggest events) and no more. Otherwise the table of contents gets bloated. So both version are actually wrong. I see they removed overlinking. A player's name should be linked the first time in prose and then not linked again. So that was good. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:56, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about 'Final settings' bar He constantly removes? He removed from Sara Sorribes Tormo profile unnecessarily 45.183.132.243 (talk) 22:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He acts like a troll removing/messing other users' edits 45.183.132.243 (talk) 22:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you mean the legend that was there for "Finals by setting?" That is a content dispute between you two. When I look at Tennis Project Guidelines at what our legends include I don't see it at all. I think some articles have them and some don't. A high profile article like Novak Djokovic has a "finals by location." So does Iga Swiatek's article but it uses setting. An older article like Andre Agassi also has it. It is more normal to have it than not so they are going against the norm to remove it. You should point those examples out to them. I restored those charts. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That guy is a troll! He's nos messing WTA New rankings for their players. Look what he did on Viktoriya Tomova profile - removing and messing good edits! Please, you need to give a harsh warning to him 45.183.132.243 (talk) 14:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• now

45.183.132.243 (talk) 14:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While many of his edits looked fine, the edit on current ranking seemed more like an error. I fixed that error. They did the same on another article so I fixed that and left as such in the edit summary. If the error on rankings continues to pop up I let them know to be more careful. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just like I assume you made some errors (they do happen). We never use bgcolor anymore... that's ancient html. I simply removed the offending additions like I did to the other editor. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My editions - in the "worst" scenario - are aesthetic differences, not big deal; that's not even equal to that user who REMOVES info (e.g. 'Final Settings' removal) But ok - now please correct Diana Shnaider, Alycia Parks, Linda Fruhvirtová, Magdalena Fręch, Anastasia Zakharova, Laura Pigossi - all these profiles that user messed up recently 45.183.132.243 (talk) 13:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

He messed up once again Leylah Fernandez career statistics page - which you correct recently. He's using a 'new' user profile btw. He acts like a troll and curious how he only messes up women's tennis players wiki pages, I don't know why. You should give a harsh warning to him 45.183.132.243 (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything wrong with his edits to Fernandez. He removed 0-0 items items not in use. The others were fixed of the stuff that was wrong. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Maggie Smith on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:31, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mustang Challenge on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Antifa (United States) on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have requested a Wikipedia:Third opinion as the issue has not yet been resolved annd only two editors have as of yet participated. Munci (talk) 14:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update. It now looks resolved. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please fix Roberto Bautista Agut profile? He just won his 12th title, but I couldn't add it on his personal info. Thanks PindoramaBoyy (talk) 16:52, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you figured it out. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you undid my edit “per consensus”. Are you able to point me to that consensus? I only see it brought up at Talk:Rafael Nadal career statistics#Colours where someone questions the colours used, but received no response. — HTGS (talk) 04:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HTGS:Sure. It's in our longstanding consensus Tennis Project Guidelines. All our charts are done the same way... not centered and those colors. The template you used has actually changed many times. I looked at it and it is designed for editors to change, add new things, make up your own stuff, etc... It's a great little tool but has no providence at all. Now, if you created your own addition there and use Win/Loss with left alignment and project colors, and gave it a unique name, it might work. I'd have to see it to make sure. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about the 1915 Japan Championships. The event certainly occured but whether it was considered part of the All-Japan Championships is doubtful. Robertson's encyclopedia doesn't list it and I found a history of Japan tennis online that states association and championships began in 1922. I left it off the list deliberately. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 07:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tennishistory1877:But if you go by that philosophy, the Japan Open itself only recognizes champions from 1972, so you would need to remove all the prior champions as well. They would have to be placed on a different article. And I'm sure I have seen old newspaper clippings from the 1920s that said Fukuda was not the first champion. They don't say who was, but he wasn't the first winner of the Japan National Championship. This article is the Japan Open and all it's incarnations, so even if it wasn't called the All-Japan Championships, if it was another precursor it would belong here. It might need a footnote as to where it lays in the hierarchy, but this seems the best place for it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes maybe it would be better being included but listed with a footnote. The first event was held in 1915, I found Australian newspapers from 1915 that mention it being the first time a Japan championships was held. But whether that was considered the same event as the one from 1922 onwards is debatable. I found a source on Japan tennis history that said 1922 was the first. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 09:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be noted in the chart that 1972 is the first title recognized by the Japan Open, and that 1973 is the first event recognized by the ATP. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed your discussion on the WikiProject Tennis. Have you ever had any success getting through to User:Sashona? I left a message on their talk page about their edits on Sayaka Ishii, and instead of responding, they archived my talk page message and promptly added back in their edits. I'm sure you're familiar with their editing style, i.e. trivial information, unsourced content, grammatical errors, etc., so it's frustrating that they continuously ignore people's suggestions. And it seems in pretty bad faith to immediately archive my message instead of responding, per WP:RUCD. Mellamelina (talk) 01:27, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They do seem to like adding trivia, extending the length of headings so the table of contents is extra wide, ignoring capitalization rules, etc... never had much luck in solving it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:00, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Illegal immigration to the United States on a "Wikipedia style and naming" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Californian Olympic medalists has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 12:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Australia on a "Society, sports, and culture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 University of Idaho killings on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, it seems that you always change my edit. I don't think what's my problem in my edit. If you have any problem, welcome discuss with me. Thanks. Stevencocoboy (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stevencocoboy: And you always change mine. You said we needed singles and doubles in the wording so i complied. What we want is to keep it as short as possible so the table of contents doesn't get too wide. I'm trying to make that wording short while working in what you want. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:50, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I'm sorry that it is the best short editing. The Grand Slam event name is xx open, except wimbledon. using full name isn't any problem and will be clearly, seeing Iga Świątek in example. Also I don't think add one more word will be longer and get too wide. Hopefully you can understanding. Thanks.Stevencocoboy (talk) 04:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stevencocoboy:I don't but you seem to have no interest in my compromise. That's your prerogative, but I can always link to this conversation for future reference. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only added them because other editors did before at many sportspeople profiles. No need to be this rude PindoramaBoyy (talk) 04:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I said "The olympic rings icon is against wikipedia guidelines and not approved by tennis project. Please don't add them to player infoboxes. Thanks." Nothing rude about that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"...garbage icon" PindoramaBoyy (talk) 11:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I always call icons that are against wikipedia guidelines.... garbage icons. Icons inappropriate to an infobox or the article. And we've had to remove those icons dozens of times. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:11, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent changes to the Fleetwood Mac article. Many of the contributions are welcome and appreciated, although you are likely aware of the one addition that remains contentious. In one of the sections, you added the text Thus began the most famous and memorable incarnation of the band, which was accompanied by two references. Usually, editors will make these bold claims without including a source to back these statements up, but you found two, so I appreciate this. The problem is that the inclusion of this sentence introduces some editorializing that can be better reflected with chart positions and sales numbers. Is it really necessary to insist that the Rumours era is the most memorable when the article already covers this information with more empirical proof? I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

Thanks Dobbyelf62 (talk) 19:49, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dobbyelf62: As discussed in the talk page, the lead is really poor. Obviously the band covers three or more distinct periods, but 99% of all readers, photos, articles, reviews, are on one specific period... the Fleetwood, McVie, McVie, Nicks, Buckingham unit. It's undeniable. It should be front and center in the lead paragraph in fact and it really has to be mentioned somewhere in the main body. It isn't a question of which version was the best.... that's water cooler stuff (like with athletes) that is not encyclopedic. This is most popular, biggest sales, sourced magazines that say they are the most famous and memorable. Why wouldn't we include that fact in the article? I bought records and cds from about 1970 onward from different incarnations of the band, and I can recognize the dominance of Nicks Buckingham years. It's everywhere in our face and it is also empirical info. It's just not in data tabulation form. Our readers don't want everything in a data chart. I only added a simple sentence but it's an offshoot of the fact the whole lead is far too detailed and far too chronological in it's summary of the main body. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no denying that most coverage of Fleetwood Mac in any sort of contemporary publication is related to the Rumours lineup. Right now, we are looking at how to properly convey this information. I would be willing to continue this conversation on the Fleetwood Mac talk page so that more people can weigh in on the matter, but we can use other articles as a template on how to restructure some of the opening paragraphs. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 21:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. I have found that many bands and articles have used poor lead templates so I'll reserve judgement on that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:22, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 23:01, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]