Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Australian Open Men's Singles champions/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Dabomb87 15:25, 9 January 2010 [1].

List of Australian Open Men's Singles champions

[edit]
Nominator(s): BLUEDOGTN 03:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured list because it is up to the standards the two FL are in this topic List of US Open Men's Singles champions and List of Wimbledon Gentlemen's Singles champions, which I think this is equal to them, and that is why I am nominating this to get to FL status. BLUEDOGTN 03:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Note [c] - put the references in numerical order.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The men's singles was one of the two first events contested in 1905. " what was the other "event"?
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "because of a date change" you'll need to be more specific than that.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "all held the event" "have all held..."
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • First sentence second para has too many run-on clauses.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "season[4];" move ref after semi colon.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "since the first edition. Since the first championships" repetitive.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • " victories is co-held by Ken Rosewall " - perhaps "co-held by x men; Ken Rosewall .... with two each"?
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the lead image alt text, you haven't mentioned the fact it's a tennis racket he's holding.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure "score in the final" should be linked to "winning a set".
DisagreedBLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 12 should be a note.
Fixed.BLUEDOGTN 22:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (27 and counting) 01:07, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • "and 1986, which was because they wanted to move the tournament start to mid-January 1987 from the mid-December 1986 previously announced start date." Grammar is not great in this part, and it's unclear who "they" are. How about "and 1986 because (they) wanted to move the tournament start from mid-December 1986 to mid-January 1987."?
Fixed Again Top and Bottom concernsBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They are Tennis AustraliaBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To ensure that the grammar checks out, I recommend making a change to "1986 because Tennis Australia...". Giants2008 (27 and counting) 20:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FixedBLUEDOGTN 03:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The competition switched location every year...". Make "location" plural?
FixedBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the Australian Open, Andre Agassi holder of the most victories at four." Missing "is the" in the middle.
FixedBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The most consecutive victories is held at two victories by the following tennis players". The second use of "victories" and only use of "tennis" are redundancies and can easily be removed without changing the sentence's meaning.
FixedBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need for multiple Andre Agassi links in the lead.
FixedBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Rod Laver photo is suspicious, as I doubt the site could have released the copyright. I would recommend removing this photo.
FixedBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
FixedBLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Removed all non-three time or more times wins champions pictures, and will do it to the other articles of the Wimb, US, RG(FO), and this one.BLUEDOGTN 23:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Support – Now that my stint as a temp director is over, I can now support lists I gave full reviews to, including this one. It meets FL standards, so there's no reason for me not to. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 17:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Reywas92Talk 04:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
;Comments
  • Are the three notes in the first sentence really necessary? They seem more like a way to include vaguely relevant additional info than actual notes.
Yes they are needed big time because they are addendums to explain the complexities of the intro like it is called the Australian Open now but it was not always. Yes outdoor hard courts except for Laver Arena.BLUEDOGTN 03:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The intro must be able to stand on its own without the rest of the article WP:Lead Section.BLUEDOGTN 03:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the last paragraph of the lead, why do all the parenthetical years include "winner"? The context clearly implies those are the years the person won.
It was done that way before I got to these articles, and the Wimbledon got to FL status with them so I left it that way. I could change it if you want on all of the articles?
Yes, please.
Fixed on all articles go look!BLUEDOGTN 07:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why do the years without a competition have to be color-coded with a dot? "None" and the footnote get the point across, so the dot and color look silly.
So people have visual problems and need the dot and the color coded is to distiguish them.BLUEDOGTN 03:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even people with visual problems can tell the difference between it saying "None" and it saying the name and nationality of the winner. There should not be any dot or color.
I corrected it on the three it was on Australian, French, and Wimbledon, which go look!BLUEDOGTN 07:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think note i would be better included in the lead.
Where would I put them? It is in the appropriate place in the article to my recollection.BLUEDOGTN 03:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the first paragraph seems logical. This clarifies that the later years were open but the earlier were not.
I put it as the second note or B on all articles Australian, French, Wimbledon, and US, so go look!BLUEDOGTN 07:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great list overall. Reywas92Talk 02:56, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for your comments! GOOD JOB.BLUEDOGTN 07:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reywas92Talk 04:04, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article looks great, as like the other two tennis lists! Support. oncamera(t) 03:21, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Just the French Open left to conquer now. A great list Spiderone 10:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Australian_Open_Men%27s_Singles_champions/archive1&oldid=1089080693"