Fort Towson

Hello Sashona! Your additions to Francisco Cerúndolo have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. •Melecie!• ~talk~ 23:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2021 WTA Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pilsen. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cameron Norrie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lloyd Harris.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:31, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Nicolas Mahut

added a link pointing to Robert Farah

Pierre-Hugues Herbert

added a link pointing to Robert Farah

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please do not write about the future in the past tense and do not predict future events on Wikipedia, as you did in your edit to Stefanos Tsitsipas. Tsitsipas didn't climb to No. 4, he is still No. 5 in the rankings, as you can see in the official ATP Rankings. Tennis rankings are only updated on Monday after tournaments, and never during tournaments ("live" calculations are not tennis rankings). Tsitsipas' Monday ranking depends on his result in the finals. He will be either No. 4 (if he loses the match), or No. 3 (if he wins). He didn't climb anywhere yet, he is still No. 5, and his Monday ranking is still undecided. Never add things that have not happened yet, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Always wait for the official rankings on Monday, then you can write about the climbing in the past tense. Thank you.—J. M. (talk) 19:27, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ilya Ivashka, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jordan Thompson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:03, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adrian Andreev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Shevchenko.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Austin Krajicek

added a link pointing to Robert Farah

Steve Johnson (tennis)

added a link pointing to Robert Farah

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Feliciano López, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Evans.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andrei Vasilevski (tennis), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Farah.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Zdeněk Kolář, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oeiras.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI but American/Canadian tennis players date format is always in the form of MDY, not DMY. Please keep that in mind when updating stats on those articles. Thank You. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:35, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mitchell Krueger, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jordan Thompson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Joe Salisbury

added a link pointing to Robert Farah

Rajeev Ram

added a link pointing to Robert Farah

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on 2015 Internazionali BNL d'Italia – Men's doubles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem to delete, but I noticed the link to this page on a lot of pages is broken and needs to be replaced. Sashona (talk) 06:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And noticed more pages representing different years ,2015 and before, and maybe after, related to Italian Open (tennis) are also deleted for singles and doubles. All the links in the tennis players profile pages pointing to these are broken. They need to be updated in bulk or manually. Sashona (talk) 02:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Joe Salisbury, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Farah.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:26, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit on the Schwartzman page. He made the SFs (as it correctly stated) at Barcelona. Not sure why you said he only made QFs. Please do more research before changes in future. Thank you.Pennsylvania2 (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes he reached the semis, but in the next sentence it says he won in the quarterfinals, I was just correcting the ambiguity. So it would make sense to say what level he reached first and then comment that he won on that level. So I reverted your change back. Sashona (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rafael Nadal, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jordan Thompson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making the section headers too long and to grandiose as happened at Casper Ruud. Sure if a player wins all four majors in the same year (a Grand Slam), that would be "historic", but it really needs to be something extremely important. And making the headers really long expands the width of the table of contents and makes it too wide. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:25, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from deleting my contributions, I found multiple instances when whole paragraphs were missing because you deleted them and you did not let me know. For Casper Ruud, historic header it is because he is the first Norwegian to reach a grand slam. It is quite important in the whole country of Norway and also to all the tennis fans and was acknowledged by all the official press not tabloids. As for the length of the headers of there is somewhere any guidelines I would be glad if you can point me to them. Sashona (talk) 05:07, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not supposed to let you know... if you add something and it gets deleted you are supposed to bring it to talk page of the article and convince others of it's accuracy and need in the article. You do not add it back. I'm just trying to help you out here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I am supposed to go back and check my work every time. That sounds really tedious and time consuming and it is the first time I hear about that. I contribute a lot and it would be good courtesy when people delete something to let know the contributor in the talk page. Plus I do not have instructions how to do that. Please can you bring it yourself to the talk page, if you do not agree with it. I appreciate your help but deleting people’s contributions instead of adding contributions yourself is not productive. I am trying to do a good job contributing and would appreciate if I have encouragement instead of disparaging comments. Have a nice weekend! Sashona (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's exactly what you are supposed to do. And my remarks here were spot on and to the point. Only your comments are a problem with parroting my my own comments. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:11, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is really not quite a constructive conversation. I think you need to change your delivery style, it is the only thing over the top I saw so far. And try not be so “ruud”, no pun intended. As for the parroting not even sure what you are talking about. Keep up the good work and try to be more professional, and please stop deleting entire paragraphs. Sashona (talk) 04:15, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have edited this entry on 21 June to say Burrage has made her top 150 debut in the WTA rankings. This will not happen until the rankings are released on Monday 27 June, so please either say this is projected or remove the comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ancienterracht (talk • contribs) 09:05, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andrej Martin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thiago Monteiro.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Hamad Međedović

added a link pointing to Nicolas Jarry

Yannick Hanfmann

added a link pointing to Steve Johnson

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With tennis articles, please try and limit the width of table of contents. For phones especially the boxes get too wide. Each year heading should be the top one or maybe two things... it should not be a synopsis of all the good things that happened. That's what the prose is for. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, will do my best! Sashona (talk) 20:59, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And to be honest, most of what I see you do is pretty darned good and includes sources. I leave most of it alone. With some of our biggest named players we use the toc limiter {{TOC limit|2}} after the lead section so the toc won't get too wide or too long, and with newer players it's also no big deal. It's the mid-level players or players with mid-length careers that we tend to be more wary. Perhaps I'm making the inter-article headers too short, and that's probably by habit. There's no hard and fast rule at Tennis Project so I'll try to be more flexible. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you really appreciate the feedback! Sashona (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mate Pavić, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Venus.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

see here: No.... - = world No. 9 (Kasatkina) ... !!! 95.222.28.7 (talk) 16:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by SO BIG ? If it is about capitalizing can you give the exact rules from Wikipedia on capitalizing or not? Or you just making your own. Sashona (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the IP is correct. Standard grammar and wikipedia consensus is that "world number 1" is not capitalized. However the abbreviation for number, No., is always capitalized. Hence we get world No. 1. Obviously at the beginning of a sentence all words are capitalized. I hope that helps. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I sent you an article in comments in Daria Kasatkina page from sportskeeda.com as an example where it is capitalized. It is proper English. I hope that explains it. Sashona (talk) 19:50, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But how tennis organizations do it is not really how wikipedia does it. I think the general rule for all capitalizations is that it needs to be capitalized in almost all outside publications to be considered a proper name. Even if it was 50/50 we would not capitalize it here. There's always a discussion about this taking place on wikipedia and the latest is at Manual of Style/Capital letters on the non-capitalization of "royal family." Most press do not capitalize "world number one." I still feel that when used in a header it's fine to use capitals and it's why in my own personal writing I use things like "Men's Singles"... but it has been pointed out to me that at wikipedia that is not the way it works. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but in tennis it is different, so both are correct. Here is the tennis organization ITF take on that too: https://www.usta.com/en/home/coach-organize/tennis-tool-center/run-usta-programs/national/itf-world-tennis-number.html Sashona (talk) 20:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I don't doubt you. I had the same info for "Men's Singles" and "Women's Singles" but it was buried by consensus at wikipedia. One other thing against World No. is that if you look at actual grammar books and articles they say not to capitalize. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you do this? [1] Her Toronto performance was added to the table and you now making confusion that the last added performance was the one in Rome?? JamesAndersoon (talk) 10:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies was probably looking at doubles section. Sashona (talk) 16:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Karen Khachanov, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eritrean.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rafael Matos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thiago Monteiro.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2023 ATP Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Toledo.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Denis Kudla, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jordan Thompson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Charts like the top ten chart on Jannik Sinner career statistics are extremely trivial in nature and original research. I'm not sure you can find these charts intact like this in any book or press release. Listing a chart of players who were ever in the top ten means they might have only been ranked 200 when Sinner actually played them. That is ridiculously trivial and of interest only to a very few tennis fanatics.... that is not supposed to be in wikipedia articles by guidelines. Sure, players that were actually in the top 10 when they played is a reasonable entry that is not trivial, but not anyone that has ever been on the top 10 or top 20. This has been discussed in several articles including the Iga Swiatek stats talk page. If we opened it up for discussion to general Wikipedia editors for an up or down vote, many tennis charts we use might get chopped as borderline trivia, but these top 10 at any time charts surely would get eliminated. It's not a question of work... they should never have been created to begin with. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So who makes the decision, just one person, you in this case, to delete all this huge amount of work collected for years?! I thought Wikipedia is a place where things are more democratic including voting on what to be removed. Am I wrong?! How do,I open a discussion about this charts? Sashona (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was discussed in various places including Swiatec place I mentioned. Original Research is a Wikipedia staple, see Wikipedia:No original research. The Iga Swiatek discussion with the new combined chart that is replacing all those charts is at Talk:Iga Świątek career statistics. I think there will now also be an extra column added at the far right to include the overall head-to-head of those players. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I left a note on talk:Iga’s page. I think the changes should be only for the new player pages that will be created in the future. Sashona (talk) 22:19, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop deleting the charts for records over top 10 players on pages I am currently making changes like Sara Errani page for example. I would appreciate if you make those massive deletes once I am done. Also we said we are not deleting these charts especially for the older already existing profiles like Sara Errani career statistics page. Thank you. Sashona (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making changes, which I do not really understand by the way, to the charts for records over top 10 players, every time I make changes to a tennis player profile. I feel harassed. If it was not Wikipedia I would say this is literally stalking. I do not see you making changes to any other pages other people update. Thank you. Sashona (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2022 ATP Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Noah Rubin.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alexander Shevchenko (tennis), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nuno Borges.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Emil Ruusuvuori

added a link pointing to Nuno Borges

Lorenzo Sonego

added a link pointing to Daniel Evans

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Julia Grabher, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miami Open.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jan-Lennard Struff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ben Shelton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tomás Martín Etcheverry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pavel Kotov.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Diego Schwartzman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nuno Borges.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:31, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Laslo Djere, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ben Shelton.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 07:51, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Caroline Dolehide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miyu Kato.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:24, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sashona, I've occasionally noticed you remove certain red links that I've consciously placed in articles. [2][3][4] Without edit summaries, it's hard to know your intention. Wikipedia:Red link says not to remove red links unless you're certain that the subject isn't notable; all of these are probably notable for their college careers, and there's no harm in the red link sitting for a while. Thanks for all the work you do to keep tennis articles updated. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 20:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My question is how are you certain that the subject is notable and by adding a non-existent link, you ask for a creation of a separate page.we cannot have hundreds of tennis players pages created just because they played in college. Thank you. Sashona (talk) 20:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If it seemed they weren't notable, I'd avoid mentioning their names entirely. Most of these red links are among the highest-ranked current college players – they're not random: e.g., for [5], drafts for Lea Ma (started by me) and Amelia Rajecki (not by me) already exist. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 21:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, things like total weeks at world number one and first quarterfinal at a particular Slam (especially when the player has already won other Slams) aren't necessary; more significant achievements like the ones already in the header are sufficient. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 08:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So being number 1 for 80+ weeks is not an achievement enough, she is number 10 in the Open Era overall list of world No. 1 by weeks. There is no more significant achievement worth to be included in the header. And why does Novak Djokovic year 2023 header not show a record 400 weeks achievement as well? Can you give me examples of achievements that should be in the header? Sashona (talk) 21:23, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A running total (or how high on the list of total weeks at No. 1 she is) isn't necessary for the header, nor does it need to be mentioned/updated every time in the prose (e.g. now she's tenth, now she's ninth, etc.) – a more appropriate achievement would be every time she hits a milestone, like 100 weeks at No. 1. I can't speak for Djokovic, as I don't edit his article, but something like that would be far more appropriate than a running total/implying how high she is on the list of total weeks. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 01:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand but not when we are talking about being in the top 10 of all the time and also finishing the year at no.1 again. Again would like to know what constitutes a significant achievement if 85 weeks at No. 1 is not? Sashona (talk) 02:31, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's on a case-by-case basis – some players are more successful than others, so certain achievements are more significant for some players than others given that might be the most success they have – but a milestone like 100 weeks (if she reaches it) would be more appropriate for someone like Świątek, as 85 isn't a milestone by any stretch. For her, it would be about continuing to build on her existing achievements, being Grand Slams and other titles, weeks at No. 1 when appropriate, and only year-end No. 1 if it breaks some sort of record (e.g. consecutive or total); if she ends up being the top player pretty consistently over a long period of time, only dropping from top spot occasionally, it doesn't make sense to mention year-end No. 1 every year. In any case, the header for 2023 as it is now is sufficient, so we'll see what happens next year. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 03:47, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I completely disagree, not every player breaks a record but we still add achievements in the header. I would like to get an article about the format and what should be in the header agreed by everyone, not an opinion by one person, if the header is sufficient or not. And please stop reverting changes on my talk page, stick to reverting changes in your own talk page, as you did earlier. Sashona (talk) 04:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We discussed earlier about Iga Swiatek above that if the player breaks a record like “consecutive year-end No. 1”, it is ok to put it in the header. Why the second revert? Is it because you disagree with what you said or you just don’t want me to make changes? Sashona (talk) 23:28, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to ping you to bring your attention to Talk:Weaving#Plagiarism_issue, but something went wrong so I'm notifying you the old-fashioned way. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Taro Daniel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ASB Classic.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Océane Dodin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lin Zhu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, i respect your opinion. I know beating 6 unseeded player is not an achievement but i added that because it is going in the record books. Only 2 players have done that before in open era - Martina Hingis and Arantxa Sanchez Vicario. That is why i mentioned that info with reliable source in the reference on 2024 Australian Open – Women's singles page.

I request you to re-think your decision on whether we should add that info or not.

bro keep up the good work on Wikipedia. Priyavrat Chaudhary (talk) 18:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and thank you for your contributions but we cannot compare when it was a different seeding system with only 16 seeds, back in the 1990, plus we cannot mention everything on the front, main page of the AO. You can add this to the individual page for Qinwen Zheng if you think it is worth mentioning. Sashona (talk) 18:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is that a record if two players have already achieved that? I don’t understand why we need to mention such an unimportant achievement if it is not even a record. Sashona (talk) 19:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What has traditionally been done in tennis articles is to list Grand Slam tournament finals above other finals.... they are so much more important. And since the term "Grand Slam" means something different in tennis terms, we either use "majors" or "Grand Slam tournaments." The word "significant" is usable or not for other events. If there are 1000 finals, Olympics, WTA Finals.... then we can lump them under "Other significant finals" or not. If there is only one then we can simply use "WTA 1000" as a header. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for so many headings, we are trying to reduce the information topics not make them more. WTA 1000 are as important as “Grand Slams” or “Majors” (words used interchangeably, to say the same thing, as you know), for example the Indian Wells tournament, a WTA 1000 and a Masters 1000, is called The FIFTH Grand Slam, so the WTA 1000 tournament finals TRADITIONALLY are listed under Significant finals, no need for change.Sashona (talk) 00:28, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WTA 1000's are of tiny importance compared with the four majors. We never call them "Grand Slams" on wikipedia. Indian Wells is not the fifth Slam by any stretch no matter how much announcers play that up for ratings. And it is not traditional at wikipedia to even use the term "significant finals." Sometimes we use it and sometimes we don't. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are using Significant finals in the profiles , here is an example Alexander Zverev career statistics#Significant finals. As you can see the Masters are under that category. Sashona (talk) 04:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another example of Jessica Pegula career statistics where we also used Significant finals section, that included Grand Slams and WTA 1000 tournaments together, before you made the change on 10 April 2024. Sashona (talk) 04:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As to Indian Wells not called a fifth slam , check the description in Wikipedia under Indian Wells Open. It states it is refered as the Fifth Slam. Sashona (talk) 04:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you think Indian Wells is actually the fifth slam have fun with that thought. And Masters events can certainly be under "Other significant finals". I'm saying if the only thing under significant finals is a Masters event then why not simply say Masters finals? Why add an extra heading? If two items appear, sure... all we need is one heading. But Grand Slam tournaments do not belong under that heading, and never have. We can't police everything... some will always be missed. The more standard way we do things is like at Novak Djokovic career statistics or Roger Federer career statistics or Serena Williams career statistics. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here found another example, Jennifer Brady career statistics#Significant finals, Grand Slams included under Significant. Sashona (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Danielle Collins career statistics. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So we are in the process of a discussion , going just above on this page on the topic, and in the middle of it, you post this. Please try better more constructive ways to reach consensus. I rest my case. Sashona (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it was just a discussion and you not continuing to engage in disruptive editing, I'd say you were correct. But everyone is telling you that you are wrong yet you continued to remove content as if engaging in a tantrum. Hence the warning. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noone is telling I am wrong besides you, hence the discussion above on the headers. I think when someone is telling you are wrong your response is to use threat tactics. I have seen how you react towards other editors as well. Sashona (talk) 23:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heaps are telling you that you're wrong. How can you not see that? I do react very similarly to other problem editors, that is true. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:23, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The editor with problems is only you, as you do not know how to resolve disputes. You are been reverted so many times, especially lately, including for example on the page you mentioned above Roger Federer career statistics. Now stop harassing me. Sashona (talk) 17:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]