Talk:List of Australian Open singles finalists during the Open Era

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Untitled

Petr Korda and Miloslav Mecir are listed with wrong countries. Petr Korda's win came as Czech, not a Czechoslovakian. Miloslav Mecir is Slovakian, but his wiki page says he retired in 1990, so he never got to play for independent Slovakia. 85.217.15.230 (talk) 12:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:36, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:41, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moving columns around

Some tennis article tables list players achievements by name first, some by date, etc. Right now we have tables here listing players with the most Australian Open finals. Usually we would want the most important aspect of the table first... the players name. While the players nationality is important, not really more than the player. It looks kind of weird to have the nationality column first and I feel it should be discussed before moving the order around. It could be done like (United Kingdom Spencer Gore). Other charts that seem in the wrong order are charts like "Most consecutive finals in the Open Era." It looks like the person with the most consecutive titles is Sweden; that the country is more important than player when it's separated by columns. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:15, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed with ForzaUV on my talk page, having separate columns allows for sorting by country to see all the finalists from each country in order of appearance, as well as for sorting by name. This would not be possible with a single column with flagicons/names together. If you look at the table at ITF World Champions#Men's singles (before I change it), you'll notice that sorting the "Player" column actually sorts by the name of the flags' respective countries, instead of the expected player names. This will need to be fixed so that like List of ATP number 1 ranked singles tennis players#ATP No. 1 ranked singles players, it sorts by the players' names. But you can only have one or the other with a merged column, and I didn't split the columns in my edit so that choice is not in dispute.
With respect to which column should go first, ForzaUV requested country go first, which matches the format of the only four featured lists the tennis project has, List of Australian Open men's singles champions, List of French Open men's singles champions, List of Wimbledon gentlemen's singles champions & List of US Open men's singles champions. These are the only tennis player list articles that have undergone the full scrutiny of the broader Wikipedia community, so it should be uncontroversial to match formatting of related articles to theirs.
I have partially reverted your revert so that the other formatting changes I made not in dispute here (abbreviated country names, downcasing, etc.) are kept. Letcord (talk) 03:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Country names shouldn't have to be abbreviated except when space is an issue. I don't see space a real issue in that chart. So even that can be controversial. Bold changes are great, you've done hundreds I don't bat an eye at. But if a bold change is made and then reverted it is controversial and should be discussed before re-adding. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:02, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fyunck, as you've probably noticed, it was actually me who asked Letcord to help me make these changes and he ended up doing all the work himself which I appreciate. It seemed to me it was an improvement, flags always come before players names at least in tennis articles, either in this style (Spain Rafael Nadal) or ( ESP | Rafeal Nadal) like how it's done in the four featured champions lists we have. I really didn't think the edit would be controversial to start a discussion about it first but hey no big deal. I'm for either of the two standard styles. If we end up having only one column for both the flags and names then my preference for it to be sortable by nationality not by name; e.g. {{sortname|Rafael|Nadal}} would be replaced with [[Rafeal Nadal]]. ForzaUV (talk) 04:00, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know it was you who mentioned it and that's fine and dandy, although it should have been done here at the talk page so everyone could see and comment. No one sees it on a personal talk page. Perhaps a different way of doing it would have developed here. I guess my initial thoughts would be this is an article about singles finalist so the country doesn't really need sorting. All we care about in that chart is what player leads the pack. The next thing is in some tables, room is at a premium so we must abbreviate the country. That's not the case here so perhaps the full country name should stay? many readers won't know what RSA or CZS or ESP are and they have phones or older computers that don't allow mouseovers to work. Some articles have charts where the year is quite important so we lead with that but this chart is really player driven, not country driven. Would this table still be good if we had no country column. Yes. Would it still be good if we had no player column? So when I thought about that I said whoa.... this needs some discussion with project members to see what everyone thinks. And you can sort by player names with flags if you do the parameters correctly. That should be a tweak. And remember, I saw no discussion on this at all until the personal talk page was linked and noticed the personal conversation between you two. I'm not saying I can't be convinced for the change, just that a discussion needs to take place to convince me and others (if they care). Note addition- I could be wrong about sorting with flagicon... it might be flag that is sortable. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:02, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ForzaUV, having a single column with "Player" as its heading that sorts by the flags and not the players' names violates the principle of least astonishment. Most people don't know all the flags, and therefore wouldn't even realize that it was the countries that were being sorted by anyway. Columns with names must always sort by the names in my view.
Fyunck(click), uncontroversial edits/requests for assistance are often discussed on non-talk pages, and very few people watch this page anyway. I've started discussions on more trafficked pages and gotten zero replies. Regarding your points, it was evidently deemed necessary to have the country as a separate column on the featured lists which are for singles champions, so I don't see why it would be any different for these singles finalists lists. Those featured lists also have the country columns first, and tennis viewers are conditioned to seeing flags before players' names (as ForzaUV has noted), so for both consistency with the featured lists and alignment with reader expectations, the countries should come first. As for the country abbreviations, firstly they make the columns a lot neater than with the unevenly-lengthed full names. Secondly, for mobile users, i.e. 70% of our readerbase, the width of even relatively narrow lists like these is still at a premium, and the abbreviated name help with that. Thirdly, readers can always click through to see the country name if they don't know one of the codes. And finally, almost zero articles like this use full country names; the only that do are List of male singles tennis players and the female/doubles equivalents, ITF World Champions and WTA Awards, which are relatively unmaintained and don't follow the modern formatting styles for tennis lists. I know you can sort by player names with flags in the columns (not with a flagicon parameter, but a sort key), my point was that you can only sort with one or the other in a merged column, whereas with two columns you can sort with both. Regardless of whether of all that is enough to convince you, you are not the sole arbiter of what changes are permitted on Wikipedia. If no other editors chime in here, just as I conceded the point about the pro majors on the Grand Slam page, so too will the choice that most of us want for this page be upheld. There is no "need" to convince you in particular, just because you patrol tennis articles. Letcord (talk) 08:00, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When I say convince me I mean convince me and any others who chime in. Of course if no one else chimes in that's a different story for an article or two. It wouldn't be enough for changes to 2000 articles. But I understand that. I've seen your posts on other pages also but if a agree I may not post anything back. And we have tennis article guidelines that require full country names on pretty much every player bio. All our WTTA and ATP Career Finals tables are full countries so as not to confuse readers with country codes they may not know. Sure we shorten it for some charts but not all. This one had full country names and it worked fine. To just shorten them for little to no reason seems wrong. And it's still always better to discuss here on the talk page if possible. Months from now someone will start reverting back and no one will know why a change was made. That starts arguments and edit wars which over 15+ years here I've had to clean up the mess that creates. It's better to be in the open where folks can refer back to the reason things were changed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:18, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No one else has raised objections so I intend to re-establish the edits ForzaUV requested (and which I agree with), to bring these finals articles in line with our featured champions lists. In my experience only a handful of editors work on tennis statistics articles (beyond updates), and the formatting improvements I've made to all others except these few have been uncontroversial (or even, appreciated), which is why I didn't start a discussion here before making the changes. I agree that when there is disagreement arguments should be had in the open, so they can be evaluated by future editors when deciding if the current consensus should change. Letcord (talk) 07:35, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Fyunck(click): You've reached the 3RR limit now, so start a discussion if you disagree [1] — imitation is the highest form of flattery [2], so I don't mind you parroting my words, but this is the discussion dealing with the disagreement. Quote from you above Of course if no one else chimes in that's a different story for an article or two — I waited three weeks to see if anyone would join in with your objections, and even signaled last week in my above comment that I was going to reinstate my changes as a final call. Please don't be a hypocrite and self-revert. Letcord (talk) 06:23, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're fairly new here so I wasn't going to push hard figuring there might be some things you don't realize. I tend to look at the article talk page in question rather than ha different one so I missed your last post. We have flag icons in front when it's in the same column as a player's name, so of course the flags come first there. But in a chart talking about a player's attributes where you are putting a flag in a separate column that's a different story. It would seem like we would want column one to be the most important column and the one the chart is about.... The Player. Then the country, then the rest. That chart isn't about the country it's about the player. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:37, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we already had that discussion, the four featured lists List of Australian Open men's singles champions, List of French Open men's singles champions, List of Wimbledon gentlemen's singles champions & List of US Open men's singles champions have flag column in front. ForzaUV flags always come before players names at least in tennis articles ... like how it's done in the four featured champions lists we have. You are the sole objector, and enough time has passed for the consensus to be implemented.
Self-revert or it's off to the edit-warring noticeboard, and your parroting of my edit summary (indicating retaliatory behavior) will not be seen in a good light. Letcord (talk) 06:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those were being done by year, not by player. And there were other example that showed otherwise. I will not self-revert when I think it's bad for the article and our readers. And there was no real consensus. A closer would have said no-consensus. We had a good editor request something but seemed to drop out of the conversation. All that was left was you and me. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:53, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain this comment: Of course if no one else chimes in that's a different story for an article or two. Letcord (talk) 02:05, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Australian_Open_singles_finalists_during_the_Open_Era&oldid=1208207078"