Jump to content

Talk:2009 Wimbledon Championships: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Assessing B-Class; Full draw, Full results; maybe some historical reference
m demoting to C, nowhere near B class, contains useless stats without significant prose or references
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WPTennis|class=B|importance=mid}}
{{WPTennis|class=C|importance=mid}}


== Ballgirl ==
== Ballgirl ==

Revision as of 19:13, 5 July 2009

WikiProject iconTennis C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to tennis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Tennis To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Ballgirl

I have no idea how to edit references, can someone add this for the ball girl story in section 2, please? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article6571986.ece sicaruma | contribs 16:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the ball girl story should be there at all - it is certainly not notable, it is more like trivia, which is discouraged on wiki. (There seems to be sime obsession with ballboy/ballgirl stories and Wimbledon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.140.187 (talk) 14:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daily summaries and notable stories

Shouldn't these sections be placed below the Seniors section?--Innerproduct (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]