Mrf8128

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Mrf8128, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 2000 CA-TennisTrophy – Doubles

A tag has been placed on 2000 CA-TennisTrophy – Doubles, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Moreover, please add more verifiable sources, not only 3rd party sources. 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. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hang on}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Japanese knotweed (talk) 12:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

tedious records

I sure am glad you take the time to edit all those tedious tennis records that change from day to day but I'm glad you do it and not me =). Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I join Fyunck in this praise. But if you could only write a couple of words of summaries, would be even better. Eight consecutive edits yesterday with zero words of summary - the editing is a shared effort, you do great service to the readers but please also keep in mind the other editors. Thank you --GoodIntentionedFreak (talk) 14:51, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

ATP world tours

Hello there! I would like to ask the reason for changing all – characters to "-". Is there a consensus backing the decision? Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 10:53, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Milos Raonic

I guess you've counted Gulbis', Kohlschreiber's and Mayer's points as well to say that Milos will be the 34th by the end of the tournament. But let's suppose an extreme situation: Ryan Harrison will go on to win the event. He competed in R64 in last year's masters (25pts.) so counting the 975 he'll receive and adding it to 369 he already owns it gives a total 1344 for him. He will push down Raonic and the others as well. So pre-counting is senseless knowing the capriciousness of tennis. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 09:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Your edits to performance timelines

Hi. I'd like to discuss about some of your recent edits to tennis articles.

1. Please don't remove the "A's" from the performance timelines of players as they represent that the player was absent from that tournament for that year and thus should be kept so that readers know.
2. Please don't add a players' results from the ATP 500 Series or ATP 250 Series as this information is already (or should be) well documented in the player's own biographical article.
3. Finally, please don't change the colour schemes of the performance timeline tables as this is also unecessary.

Since you enjoy editing tennis articles, i'm suggesting that you join the Wikipedia tennis project here if you haven't already done so. JayJ47 (talk) 03:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

First: All these things you mentioned existed before (for a long time actually), done by different other people, the removal of A in the Federer's career statistics article, the colors in Nadal's article for example and the statistics for ATP 500 and ATP 250 in both and in several other notable articles. I just followed existing ideas that I thought were better. It's just a matter of taste. Sure, maybe it is better to reach an agreement concerning small details.

Second: In a career statistics article there should be all the tournaments the player participated, they belong here more than in the biographical articles. It doesn't take too much space in a table and it says a lot about the player in many cases: if the player is very well known everybody knows what he did in big tournaments,including ATP 1000, also if the player is too young or not ranked high enough performance in big tournaments is almost nonexistent. So this is a change that has to be done if "statistics" means something. Thanks, Mrf8128 (talk) 05:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from and I (like a lot of other editors) appreciate your input. But I still think that it would be better to include "A's" in a table because one its been used for so long, and two it lets readers know that a player did not compete in a tournament that year. I disagree about including ATP 500 and 250 events in a players' statistics because it does make the table excessively long and because there is no need to include them because this information is already well documented in the player's biographical article. Furthermore, the tables have been kept in this format for so long and I believe that it is best we keep them this way. Thanks. JayJ47 (talk) 21:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I completely agree about A's as I would agree with anything else, but I understand the reason for consistency. I still disagree about 500 and 250 tournaments but this is just my opinion. I won't put this information there for sure, but what do I do if somebody else does it? Just erase it and tell him that this is not considered valuable enough? Because this will happen in the case of any player with many fans. Thanks, Mrf8128 (talk) 00:14, 30 March 2011 (UTC).

If other editors are doing the same then this is what I suggest you do. Revert/erase their edits explaining in the edit summary why you are removing/reverting their edits. Explain to them why you've chosen to do so on their talk page. Thanks for your cooperation :) JayJ47 (talk) 01:40, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, now I realized what you were saying. You are the editors, and the editors decide what is important enough to be written in tennis articles on Wikipedia. Makes sense. Thanks, Mrf8128 (talk) 01:55, 30 March 2011 (UTC).

You are not using safe web colors in Caroline Wozniacki#Singles performance timeline and other articles. For example, bgcolor=#eee gives black background when viewed in my common versions of Internet Explorer and Opera. This makes blue text nearly unreadable and black text completely unreadable. Please revert any colors you have changed away from safe web colors. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:40, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I have little knowledge of it but maybe the main problem was that #eee didn't have 6 hex digits and browsers treat that differently. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. I had no idea about that. Thanks for telling me.Mrf8128 (talk) 23:03, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a study

I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 02:31, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Djokovic Hardcourt record

Hello, I noticed you changed Djokovic's hardcourt record to 226-60 on ATP World Tour records, but atpworldtour.com has 225-60 after Miami, and Belgrade is played on clay. Is the ATP site missing something here (which they occasionally do)? Gap9551 (talk) 09:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! It was my mistake. I had Djokovic in 2007 with 44-12 on hardcourt, 17-5 on clay, 6-2 on grass and 1-0 on carpet. I recalculated and it was supposed to be 43-12,18-5,6-2,1-0. Thanks.

Barnstar Award

	The Hard Worker's Barnstar
	For doing those tedious things in tennis articles that not many want to do. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

That's very funny! Thanks a lot!Mrf8128 (talk) 20:18, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

2005 US Open – Men's Qualifying Singles

In future if you want to move a page please use the move page feature rather than copying and pasting the content. Copying and pasting destroys the page's edit history (which we need for legal reasons). Hut 8.5 21:14, 13 May 2011 (UTC).

Grand Prix Tennis Championships Series

Hello can you explain why you have been removing the references to John McEnroe, Ivan Lendl, Jimmy Connors titles they won on the Grand Prix tour that were precursors to the ATP World Tour Masters 1000 events. These tier of events were known as Championship Series on the Grand Prix tour between 1970 and 1989 and carried the highest ranking points after the Grand Slams and Year end championships as do the current Masters Series the first 2 years of the Masters series was called the Championship Series single week the name taken from the previous tour. Tennis and records associated with it did not just start in 1990 and there after and readers need to be given the correct balanced information. Please do not remove them again. --Navops47 (talk) 21:27, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• I owe you an apology I was was responding to someone else but typing in the wrong window and hit the return button by mistake. The above comment was not meant for your talk page sorry --Navops47 (talk) 21:33, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Actually i have re-checked those details you have removed the reference above to John McEnroes 16 GP Championship series titles please discuss can you discuss this with me my via either your talk page or mine and would appreciate that you not remove them again thank you --Navops47 (talk) 21:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

You're right, I removed something. What I thought I removed was just a confusion between ATP World Tour Finals and ATP World Tour 1000. I'm sorry if I removed something else also. By no means I didn't want to remove any references. Sorry about that.

• • Ok that's cool I'm of a generation that remembers and watched the men's tour avidly through the 1970's and 1980's having seen Borg, Connors McEnroe and Lendl play and still addicted to the sport today. --Navops47 (talk) 22:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, great time for tennis in 70' and 80' with Borg, Connors, Nastase, McEnroe. Also great time for men's tennis these days. Totally understandable the addiction.Mrf8128 (talk) 22:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Revisions ATP World Tour Records

Hi you have you reverted my previous edits with no explanation regarding Lendl's consectutive year semi finals and quarter finals at grand slam tournaments those figures I put in are correct you count from the year they began forward example His consecutive year semi final appearances begin: 1981 French Open (1st), 1982 US Open (2nd), 1983 3 slam semi-finals (3rd), 1984 3 slam semi finals (4th), 1985 3 slam semi finals (5th), 1986 3 slam semi finals (6th), 1987 2 slam semi finals (7th), 1988 3 slam semi finals (8th), 1989 3 slam semi finals (9th), 1990 2 slam semi finals (10th), 1991 2 slam semi finals (11th) consecutive year. the same goes for the the quarter final appearances if you think they are different to this please explain thanks --Navops47 (talk) 18:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Consecutive means here consecutive grand slams not years. You have to count starting with US Open 1985...Mrf8128 (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi understood now its very confusing maybe a note explaining what you said would help thanks for clearing that up --Navops47 (talk) 19:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Performance Timelines

Hi. I would like to inform you that a new set of performance timelines will be used from now on wikipedia to ensure that there is consistency across the board. The timelines that you have introduced and the ones that you have been using, have been deemed unacceptable by members of the Wikipedia Tennis Project. Therefore, if you decide to change timelines to the timelines that you have been using, they will be reverted in accordance with the new article guidelines which can be viewed here. A discussion was held to deem which timelines were acceptable for use on wikipedia and the final decision was that these two timelines should be used in all tennis related articles. Thank you. JayJ47 (talk) 23:28, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I have just reverted your edit to Mardy Fish's performance timeline, because it violates the new guideline that has been put in place. Please do not make edits of this nature in the future. Thanks. JayJ47 (talk) 05:33, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

What exactly does it violate? The only change that I see is a format from 97% to 98%. Every table should be at 98%? And where are those guidelines?

The tables that you have used do not match the ones that have been placed in the article guidelines. You can see them for yourself here. The size for those tables is at 98%, so yes, the tables used in performance timelines should all be at 98%. JayJ47 (talk) 07:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know that matching goes so far...it is not very clear. I advise you to do this way: post a visible note somewhere that it is necessary for the tables to be at 98% so everybody could realize. Please provide also a short motivation. ThanksMrf8128 (talk) 07:52, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

So basically, the guideline is there to set the standard that all users should follow. Minor details (e.g. the size being 98%) are not mentioned because it is assumed that the tables will be copied from the guidelines page. The guidelines are there to determine how articles should be set out and what their content should be like. JayJ47 (talk) 08:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I understand that if I just copy the table the matching will be perfect. But then? I think you have to be more specific. Provide in a note what is strict, because a table like this is made of many minor details. Thanks, Mrf8128 (talk) 08:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC).

Revisions to grand slam winning percentages

Hi if you are reverting edits please will you state where you are getting the figures please take a look at this posting Talk: ATP World Tour Records read content No 10 and comments made by Gap9551. I went from records listed at the site he suggested I look at who's data finished at 2009 and then worked out match win losses after that and use this conversion site to work out the stats % Calculator I have no problem with revisions but your not stating in the edit notes why you have changed them?--Navops47 (talk) 18:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't change to much actually, some percentages were not very correct and some player didn't have the results updated with the results from this year.

Yes they did I have added the match win loss figures added for 2010 and 2011 I went through each round of each GS tournament for the players that are active and added those to the 2009 figures using the calculator I have listed. I worked out those percentages, now if you going to change things state where your stats are coming from that are different from the ones I have, don't just change them with no explanation!! you didn't do the work on that section and if you feel strongly enough to change things why didn't you put the tables together yourself? --Navops47 (talk) 18:16, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

There were too many to discuss, but we can discuss anytime. For example Djokovic was not on the first list, but after winning Australian Open this year he has 25 victories and should be. Also he had 43 victories in US Open which is certainly not true. Ferrero had 36 victories in French Open but actually he has 33...etc.

Your missing the point if im disputing your changes you need to explain where you are getting your figures from and you need to put an explanation in the reverted edits section when you change something otherwise anyone can edit whatever they want to what ever article with no explanation as to where that information is coming from a bit like your previous answer if you have statistics factual and real whether from an external site or book at least state that please read this Minor Edits and this Edit Summary guidelines are very clear and it would not have resulted in me bombarding your talk page. --Navops47 (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi I have opened a discussion here Talk ATP Records point 11 about sources for statistical information and reverting edits please feel free to add your thoughts to the discussion thankyou--Navops47 (talk) 19:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi I have asked if you could discuss your changes in the previous requests and which you have chosen not to do so and are still reverting edits. I will be placing a request here to sort this out Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. --Navops47 (talk) 19:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

But I explained what I did, didn't I? Connors has a Wimbledon record of 84-18, and was obviously missing.

Why?

Why are you making edits like this? It's bad practice to leave unfinished HTML in a table because it means you're relying on hope that things don't change in the future. Leaving ''' or <sup> on its own could easily cause the rest of the page to be rendered in bold or superscript: try it on a talk page and you'll see what I mean. Best practice is to use complete tags. Absconded Northerner (talk) 15:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I know how it functions, it is useless in the end of a line.

No it isn't.

By leaving an unterminated bold code at the end of the previous line, I made everything appear in bold from now on.

The fact that it works okay in that template isn't a reason to remove it, because things could change in the future. You are relying on undocumented behaviour, and that is not a good idea. Absconded Northerner (talk) 15:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

2011 US Open (tennis)

That you for your many edits updating tennis articles. Just a quick note to tell you that the correct link is 2011 US Open (tennis), not 2011 US Open. Thanks. StAnselm (talk) 06:38, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I actually was supposed to know that.

September 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Angelique Kerber. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you.
Hiya. I don't mean to be rude, esp. as I see you do a lot of good work for tennis stats.. But please try to supply Edit Summaries - even brief ones like 'rank' or '+result' would be fine. Care to discuss it here, & I'll respond? Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 23:04, 4 September 2011 (UTC) Trafford09 (talk) 23:04, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure.Mrf8128 (talk) 23:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. BTW, did you know you should put ~~~~ after your posts on Talk pages, so that the system adds your signature and a time-stamp. Cheers, Trafford09 (talk) 23:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I know, of course. Sometimes I forget, unfortunately.Mrf8128 (talk) 23:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

TOTD

Tip of the day... Please summarize your work using the Edit summary box If you make anything other than a minor edit to an article, it helps others if you fill in the edit summary. Edit summaries are visible in the page history, watchlists, and on Recent changes, so they help other users keep track of what is happening to a page. If you use section editing, the summary box is filled in with the section heading by default (in gray text), which you can follow with more detail. You also can put links to articles in the edit summary. Just put double brackets around [[the article title]] like you would normally. The summary is limited to 255 characters, so many people use common abbreviations, such as sp for correcting spelling mistakes, rm for remove, ce for copy-edit, etc. Prior tip – Tips library – Next tip Read more: Edit summary

Have you got something against ESs? Care to give your view on them here? Trafford09 (talk) 08:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi - it might be interesting to note that (completely separately from the above) I just came here to comment on your lack of edit summaries at 2011 ATP World Tour Finals. You don't need detailed descriptions for every edit - just 'updating points totals' or even simply 'Nadal' so that other editors know where you've done your edits... --Pretty Green (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2011 (UTC)"

Help Needed

Hi do you know how to add in section on ATP World Tour Records that includes a winning/loss percentage for carpet courts (not per GS tournament) I tried but it then shifted the year end championships weirdly I'm not sure how to do it. I think they should be on there because they are in line with the ATP Fed Ex Carpet Realibility Zone Career list. If you do it can you check Lendl's and Borgs stats because I think Borg should be number 2 on that list when I ran the percentages thankyou --Navops47 (talk) 10:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for doing that now those stats give a complete picture--Navops47 (talk) 15:05, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the initiative.Mrf8128 (talk) 15:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Service Award

As you have over 8,000 edits and 2 years service I think you deserve this a 2nd party can give you this so I have. --Navops47 (talk) 13:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

This editor is a Veteran Editor and is entitled
to display this Iron Editor Star.

Thanks. I didn't realize that.Mrf8128 (talk) 17:20, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit Summary Award

As you have over 8,000 edits and 2 years' service, and have ignored our previous requests to either follow consensus (as in Help:Edit_summary#Always_provide_an_edit_summary) or even to discuss why you are a Special case and entitled to shun them, I think you deserve this too:

Wikipedia ads	file info – #2

2011 Shanghai Rolex Masters

Can you please provide a source for that Feliciano Lopez walkover? I looked everywhere but no sign of withdrawal by Berdych. If it is so I place my bet on him because even sportingbet has this match still on. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 21:46, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

It is on their website. http://www.shanghairolexmasters.com/English/game/single/7.html

Petra Kvitová career statistics

ITF victories and defeats in the considered. Petra Kvitová of the Overall Win–Loss 194-94, not 105-66. I corrected some errors, but you brought back. Do not change the WTA's official page examination. Alptns90(talk) 06:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Depends what you consider. In 194-94 record you have also victories from Qualifying matches, and also matches outside WTA tour. It is like adding challengers victories and losses for men.Mrf8128 (talk) 17:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Valid for all matches played. Other players Kim Clijsters career statistics and Maria Sharapova career statistics can examine.Alptns90(talk) 17:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you care so much about consistency, why then Kvitova doesn't have is the table also her ITF titles? As long as you count the matches, you have to count the titles also. That record doesn't appear.Mrf8128 (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Not to mention the titles by ITF, WTA titles is recognized. ITF is valid only in winning and losing. WTA brought such an application. Alptns90(talk) 04:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Petra Kvitova's career began in 2006. Fed Cup and ITF matches should take place. Overall Win-Loss should be commensurate with the WTA.Alptns90(talk) 13:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Stats pages

Just so you know there is some talk going on about removing a lot of tennis stat pages. I have no idea how you stand on this but if you want to weigh in on either side of the coin it's at What Wikipedia is not. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. There is indeed a lot of talk. It will take a while until I understand the main point, but in general I am in the favor of tables, not too much text. Thanks again.Mrf8128 (talk) 20:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

ATP World Tour Records

Thanks for working out the winning percentages correctly --Navops47 (talk) 07:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I didn't change much, just updated with the results from the current Australian Open. Thanks for improving the article.Mrf8128 (talk) 07:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Singles performance timelines

Hi could you add the WCT finals performance timelines to those players that won it, it was a YEC event for that tour. I'm a bit thick and don't know how to do it properly by the way they look better thanks--Navops47 (talk) 09:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I'll do it. I have to do some research first. Thanks Mrf8128 (talk) 09:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much by the way I added a new section on the WTA Tour records for Grand slam w/l performances I think that article needs to start looking more in line with the ATP World tour records what do you think?--Navops47 (talk) 09:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree definitely with that. I thought about it, is just the WTA site doesn't have very good statistics so it will take a long time. It doesn't help also that the interest in WTA is not so big so there won't be many contributors. But it should be done at some point. Mrf8128 (talk) 09:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

WTA Records

I have been moving stuff around since we last spoke trying to bring layout in line with ATP WT Records have a look, I'll keep chipping away --Navops47 (talk) 06:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I noticed actually today. It starts to look better. Where do you take the statistics, just from WTA?Mrf8128 (talk) 06:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

There were pdf file links to the WTA archive dated Jan 2012 already posted under the previous layout so from there mainly. I'm not at home at the moment otherwise I have source books from the WTA and others but I am overseas working at the moment, feel free to provide updated info and sources page no's etc. --Navops47 (talk) 06:41, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, it is better to use just the WTA site, so that anybody can check. Mrf8128 (talk) 07:06, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi have added a new section and comment on Talk:WTA Tour records about me updating the article it saves me going to every ones talk pages--Navops47 (talk) 09:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Important Discussion

There is a big discussion going about cutting a lot of the current tennis record related articles from 35 down to a much smaller number you are a big contributor on the stats sided you thoughts would be welcome here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tennis#Template:Years_in_tennis--Navops47 (talk) 22:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I am aware about such a discussion, but I still don't understand where is the problem. I think there are out there a lot of stupid pages with tennis records and we can merge them somehow. But who can decide that?Mrf8128 (talk) 22:28, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Technically all major registered contributors to record articles and registered wiki tennis project members you would fit in one or either of those you do a lot of stat its more about how we group the new and or merged articles by time period pre 1920 pre 68, post 68 or post 72 etc please weigh in with your thoughts--Navops47 (talk) 22:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

In line with recent discussions with I have created an experimental sandbox here User:Navops47/sandbox to do stuff under the possible new heading/article womens 'Tennis all-time records and statistics' so everything from the first Grand Slam tournament in 1877 or earlier if we go this way there would be a mens Tennis all-time records and statistics and mens and womens Tennis all-time Grand Slam tournament records and statistics. What do you think?--Navops47 (talk) 01:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

It would be very good to have an all time statistics, but do we have the data? Mrf8128 (talk) 01:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Well some users have access to a lot of historical stuff like User:Fyunck(click) came across this site you'll love it click tennis option at the top http://mcubed.net Navops47 (talk) 06:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion to use a sandbox

Hi. I notice that you use your user page to gradually build up article content - but that's an unusual practice, as it results in an untidy history of your user page - like that now.

What most editors do is to use a sandbox, which is a separate page where one can do any number of experiments & edits. Then when they've finished, they copy the contents of the sandbox into the proper resting place. Do you follow me?

For instance, here - User:Mrf8128/sandox1 - is a sandbox just for you.

As you see, it's in red (empty) at the moment. If you use it, it will go blue.

Of course, you can rename it to anything you like, and create further sandboxes.

A sandbox like this is just one example of a subpage.

Hope this may help. Trafford09 (talk) 12:45, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks.Mrf8128 (talk) 21:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Albano Olivetti, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. When you recently edited 2012 BNP Paribas Open – Women's Singles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Johanna Larsson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Careful with images

Hi. You should actually avoid altering the punctuation marks (or any other characters) in an image file, as you did with this edit, since that removes the image from the page. I've corrected this. -- James26 (talk) 09:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I know I did and I was supposed to correct it but apparently I didn't. Thanks,Mrf8128 (talk) 17:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC).

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. When you recently edited 2012 Grand Prix Hassan II – Singles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Donald Young (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Consecutive 10+ titles

Hi haven't been on in a while, hope your well? I added John Mc Enroes 1984-85 two 10+ consecutive titles seasons yesterday ATP WT Records and didn't do a very good job I'm currently in Sri Lanka can you please add them back in correctly many thanks --Navops47 (talk) 03:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, how are you? I noticed, but I removed it as McEnroe doesn't have 10 titles in '85, he has only 8. He has 13 in '84 but there are not 2 consecutive years with 10+ titles.Mrf8128 (talk) 12:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

That's odd because I saw the figures for both years here 1984 Grand Prix (tennis) and here 1985 Grand Prix (tennis) giving him in 84 these John McEnroe (13) Masters, Philadelphia, Richmond WCT, Madrid, Brussels, Dallas WCT, Forest Hills WCT, Queen's Club, Wimbledon, Toronto, US Open, San Francisco, Stockholm, and in 85 these John McEnroe (10) Masters, Philadelphia, Memphis, Houston, Milan, Chicago, Atlanta, Stratton Mountain, Montreal, Stockholm can you re-check thanks--Navops47 (talk) 04:21, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

We may be right, but on the ATP site on his profile says only 8. That what I always used for statistics. Other than that I don't know...Mrf8128 (talk) 12:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Your RUDE edits to Li Na performance timelines

Why you eliminate Li Na's performance in Moscow, Berlin and Charlston？ They had been all Tier I tournaments before 2009. You eliminate them without any comments. You should not do that. I am disappointment for your edit on Li_Na_career_statistics.

ATP World Tour records Consecutive 5+ titles

Hi again I think these statistics are worth adding also they are significant enough

• 1. Connors 9 yrs 1972-80
• 2. Borg 7 yrs 1974-80
• = McEnroe 7yrs 1979-85
• 3. Nadal 6yrs 2005-10
• 4. Nastase 5yrs 1971-76
• = Sampras 5yrs 1993-97
• = Federer 5yrs 2003-07
• 5. Laver 4yrs 1970-74
• = Newcomber 4yrs 1971-74

Could you create a new table your far quicker me

Thanks --Navops47 (talk) 05:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

By the way Rod Laver had 14 consecutive seasons 1960-74 of 5+ tiles and 6 consecutive seasons of 10+ titles 1964-69 how's them for records? --Navops47 (talk) 05:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in but I see a problem here. For one thing, the ATP didn't exist until late in 1972. The ATP Tour started in 1990 and the ATP World Tour started in 2009. So the chart that is suggested here would be incorrect. I'm not saying this info is insignificant but if ATP tour is in the title it would need to be from 1990 on. It could be under Open Era records. Also what kind of titles? Connors was known to play in lots of smaller tournies to pad his record. And why the arbitrary 5+ titles? Why not 4 or 6? Just some things to think about. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:51, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah forgot about the damn 1972 cut of point (bummer from a parity point of view) it goes back to the debate earlier in the year about merging or reducing the amount of records articles we have into a more streamlined number to provide readers with a fuller picture :(I see that's not been done and doubt it will really everyone's time constrained nowdays. As for the titles why not consecutive 11+ or 12+ as opposed to 10+ somebody added that cut of point to put dear old Mr Fed at the top of records again I sense a conspiracy here :) I don't believe Connors worked out his annual tour strategy in order to pad records more about the cash really. --Navops47 (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Revised to 1972

• 1. Connors 9 yrs 1972-80
• 2. Borg 7 yrs 1974-80
• = McEnroe 7yrs 1979-85
• 3. Nadal 6yrs 2005-10
• 4. Sampras 5yrs 1993-97
• = Federer 5yrs 2003-07
• 5. Nastase 4yrs 1972-76

Peace and happiness --Navops47 (talk) 06:23, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Is this not at the top of the article page?

The ATP World Tour, or ATP, was formed in 1972. The men's professional tour, known as the Grand Prix tennis circuit from 1970 to 1989, was administered by the Mens Tennis Council from 1974–1989, which was a sub-committee of ATP, ITF and tournament representatives.[1] The ATP became the only governing body for men's tennis from 1990.--Navops47 (talk) 06:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

WP Tennis Goals

Hi Mrf8128, I recently added a section on our WikiProject Tennis talk page with a few questions and suggestions about the project's goals as they are currently formulated (see WP Tennis – Goals). Looking for a bit more feedback than received so far (it's a bit quiet over there) and would appreciate if you can drop by and give your thoughts so we can hopefully (further) improve our tennis project / goals. Thx!--Wolbo (talk) 09:35, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nikolay Davydenko career statistics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Qatar Open (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

bgcolor is old html

I see you removing style="background in favor of bgcolor in articles such as Tennis performance timeline comparison (men). This in incorrect syntax for wikipedia. bgcolor is outdated html and the stylesheet version is preferred. See Help:Table#Color.3B_scope_of_parameters. If bgcolor is already there I see no big deal to leave it, but to change from the more correct to the less correct seems very wrong here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of tennis rivalries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hewitt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:29, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

no post-dating rankings WP:Crystalball

Maybe this hasn't been explained to you in the past but please don't update any rankings before the ATP website does. We are not a Crystal Ball. Otherwise it's original research which is against policy. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about that, I know very well about the Crystal Ball. It's just next week the rankings won't be updated, there won't be any changes in them until after two weeks.Mrf8128 (talk) 22:27, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Understood. I always like the way your handle rolls off the tongue.... Mr. Fate-128...whatever that means. Later. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Djokovic–Murray_rivalry for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Djokovic–Murray_rivalry is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Djokovic–Murray_rivalry until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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.

Rivalries discussion

See, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tennis#Rivalries.HotHat (talk) 04:14, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Bryan's

You maybe intrested in 2013 Bob and Mike Bryan tennis season article, and want to do some editing.HotHat (talk) 06:39, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mrf8128. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:27, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

November 2020

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Fabrice Santoro. 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. Wolbo (talk) 18:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

You were already informed on your talk page in 2013 (!) by Fyunck(click) that the bgcolor attribute is deprecated and should not should be used. CSS should be used instead. Do not (re-)add it to articles. --Wolbo (talk) 18:03, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bradley Klahn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian Open. 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) 06:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Magda Linette career statistics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2019 China Open.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tímea Babos career statistics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian Open.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Performance timeline updates

To avoid confusion and double counting, these charts are updated at the conclusion of a tournament or when the player's participation has ended. Please be careful with that. JamesAndersoon (talk) 15:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kwon Soon-woo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Anderson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Removing abbreviations

Hello, there. You removed my abbreviated forms of Round of 16 through Round of 128 on the 2021 French Open tennis page. May I ask why you did this? Qwerty284651 (talk) 15:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I think I changed the point system completely, it didn't look good to me.

Mrf8128 (talk) 15:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alexander Bublik, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Anderson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Timea Bacsinszky career statistics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 2019 China Open.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited All-time tennis records – men's singles, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jack Crawford and Francis Lowe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 30

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lorenzo Sonego, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kevin Anderson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Prematurely updating singles performance timeline

Hello, please do not update a players singles or doubles performance timeline with an event before their participation in said event has ended, as you did at Taylor Fritz for the 2021 St. Petersburg Open. Nagorblliw (talk) 14:42, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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) 00:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Kaja Juvan

Her WTA career W/L is 24-27 (not 24-28). She did play 14 tournaments in 2021, but she lost the "Monterrey WTA 250" tournament (February 2021) by Walkover. So her score for 2021 is 13-13 (not 13-14).

• Walkover (not even appearing on the court) -- doesn't count in WTA/ATP official W/L statistics.
• Retired -- on the other hand, does count in WTA/ATP official W/L statistics. Sportomanokin (talk) 12:15, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Different Masters Titles

Hello, You have been asked to contribute to the subject in the larger forum on the subject Talk:Tennis Masters Series records and statistics. Your contribution is important in improving the article. Cheers...122.162.198.233 (talk) 16:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Tennis Records - Ranking weeks

Hello!

Thanks for the regular updates on the ranking weeks!! Small question: Don't you think it would be better/clearer if we would only see the top 5 of the ranking weeks. With a exception for the top 2 because Lendl and Sampras are on the same amount weeks.

Since a few weeks we also see Nadal his 6th place for the top 1 and Lendl and Sampras for the top 10.

What do you think?? Sportfan82 (talk) 08:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Actually I do, and it used to be like that. Recently appeared bigger lists including the ones with Grand Slam title/matches.

I don't know if they will last like that for too long. Mrf8128 (talk) 12:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Someone else already repaired it!!!

Have a great day! And...keep up the good work!! Sportfan82 (talk) 07:50, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)