Talk:Svetlana Kuznetsova/GA4

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

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 14:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All images need {{personality rights}}--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done--GoPTCN 16:22, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The following issues seem to remain unresolved from GA2 by reviewer Philcha (talk · contribs)--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would be nice but it is not possible to make one. Kuznetsova had no affairs.--GoPTCN 08:43, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Kuznetsova's win over World No. 11 Anastasia Myskina in the second round of the Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells, California was her first over a top-10 player this year" - World No. 11, top-10 player? --Philcha (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC). Reiterate now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done
  • "Kuznetsova's came at Wimbledon" - what's missing? --Philcha (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC). Still seems ungrammatical.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done
  • "At the doubles, they were defeated ..." - who? --Philcha (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC). Still don't know who her doubles partner was.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • And "At..." or "In ..."? Please check this right through the article. A long time ago, a French teacher told me prepositions are the hardest thing to master in 2nd languages. --Philcha (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC) Given wimbledon example above, I reiterate this.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am pretty sure it is "at the doubles". Also I think you can say both "at Wimbledon" or "in Wimbledon", but I am not a native speaker...
  • SK played in the womens' and mixed doubles in Paris. --Philcha (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC) searching the word mixed yields no results.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done
  • SK played in the womens' and mixed doubles in Wimbledon. --Philcha (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC) searching the word mixed yields no results.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:07, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, done
  • She only played in 2003 as far as I can see; I added her best results--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LEAD
  • Already in the first paragraph.--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2004, as stated in the second para.--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think this is needed.--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • State when she became highest ranked (#2, I believe), how long she held this rank, and if notable, which tournament propelled her to that rank.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:30, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It says "As a result,..:"--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exactly, so I removed it. Tennis player drop and climb all the time.--GoPTCN 18:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it is still reasonable to add length of time (in weeks) at her peak ranking in both singles and doubles. It is important.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox already contains this info, so I think this is redundant.--GoPTCN 16:33, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the first paragraph is summarizing this already.--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now "She has reached the finals of each grand slam at least once, winning the Australian twice" needs to have "as a doubles player" at the beginning or end.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is not clear to me what her mixed doubles summary will be like. Maybe a sentence like she occasionally played mixed doubles, but has had no significant results might be applicable.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:34, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the infobox already states this things.--GoPTCN 16:33, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It shows she never did that well. It does not document that she did not play that often. (I meant to add this detail to the infobox).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox is already very large.--GoPTCN 18:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Pairing with Elena Likhovtseva she climbed to No. 3 WTA in doubles and never broke her record." - it seems like this sentence belongs in the next paragraph and I am not sure what record you are talking about.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:07, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reworded and moved--GoPTCN 12:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and never broke this record" should probably be something like, "which remains her career-high"

Note: I have been making copy edits to the beginning of the article (Lead, Early life, Career: 2000, 2001-2002 and 2003) to assist GoP in his efforts but realize that TonyTheTiger is now conducting his review. To prevent further risk of our edits & review getting their wires crossed I'll wait until the outcome of the review before making any further edits. Two final observations for GoP: there are a few deadlinks and the subsection "Playing Style" does not belong in the "Off-Court" section.--Wolbo (talk) 14:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If your copyedit will take less than a week or so, I would prefer if you complete it before I finish my review.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:00, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(2x ce) Thanks for your copyedits. I will fix these issues. Regards.--GoPTCN 15:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have expanded the playing style, fixed the dead links and formatted the last sections.--GoPTCN 15:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
TTT, I think it would probably be best if I finish my 'non-review review/copyedit' and it should not take long at all, certainly not a week. GoP, is that OK with you or do you want to proceed directly with the GA review? As you are the one who requested the GA review I'll leave the choice up to you.--Wolbo (talk) 16:03, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I am a participant at WP:CUP, so I don't want to lose in this round. If this passes I get 60 points and will probably advance.--GoPTCN 16:33, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The copyeditor was already ahead of where I am in the article. I am still working on the LEAD. Even without a copyedit, I am not sure this would pass within the next week. I have not looked at /GA3 and have only read the LEAD other than look at /GA2. Are these your only potential points?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have Otis Redding in reserve, which is a good candidate considering its history of turbulent nominations...--GoPTCN 17:29, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Try to get your points with Redding. I am not sure this one will make it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Finalized my review and (significant) copy edit session. --Wolbo (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2000
ITF Junior Career
  • When she defeated her opponent--GoPTCN 08:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have never said when she appeared "In Minsk, Belarus". If I understand rankings correctly, they are dated as of the end of a specific week. I am asking you to say something like "receiving her first ranking of 889 during the week ending Month DD, YYYY", after adding the date of the tournament.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2001–2002
  • Completely redundant.--GoPTCN 08:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, she lost in the qualifying rounds of both the French Open and Wimbledon." - clarify that this was previously and unpipe the tournament years.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:25, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you explain what "unpipe" means? Done the first.--GoPTCN 08:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2003
  • "Kuznetsova participated at Wimbledon, where in the fourth round, she defeated Maria Sharapova to reach her first Grand Slam quarterfinal". What was Sharapova ranked/seeded at the time?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:32, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems that the copyedit stops here. Please seek the copyeditor to resume. The article will not pass without a copyedit. I don't wish to continue reviewing the rest until it has been copyedited.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:32, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could you be more specific? The copyeditor copyedited the whole article, by the way.--GoPTCN 08:24, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It states that she won over a top-20 player--GoPTCN 08:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Getting back to my original concern, is this the highest ranked opponent that she had beaten up to that point in her career. If this was her 2nd victory over a top 20 opponent, then it had to be.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:04, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2004
  • If you mean Dubai then it states that Williams was a former #1--GoPTCN 12:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2005
  • "Kuznetsova reached the quarterfinals of for her second time before losing to top seed Davenport." seems ungrammatical.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2006
  • Removed as incorrect.--GoPTCN 08:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2007
  • What do you mean? She simply improved the ranking after winning. --GoPTCN 08:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do you mean? She simply improved the ranking after winning. --GoPTCN 08:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems that there might have been a tournament or two where she was ranked as the number 1 seed. It would be interesting to point out any such instances.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:52, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There might be some, but I really don't see how it is notable and I removed many minor tournaments per the second GAN.--GoPTCN 08:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added some seeding information--GoPTCN 16:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you mean wtatennis.com? This is the official site of WTA which archives all the scores in the past and present.--GoPTCN 18:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • You just need to present a WP:V reference for the reader. Your source verifies she was a #1 seed, but does not enable the reader to confirm this was the first time.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only Henin was number-one.--GoPTCN 08:04, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2008
  • "After the latter loss, she dropped out of the top five in the world rankings for the first time in two years." Was this when she fell from #2? Say when she fell from number two and how many weeks the stay lasted.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2009
  • I looked at the player statistics, but she never reached #2 that year.--GoPTCN 16:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not sure what you mean.--GoPTCN 14:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • She ended the year at #3. You said you checked if during the year she was ever #2. Which means you checked before the time when we have documented that she was #3. Did you check after the time to see if she rose from #3 to #2?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:01, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • She never achived a better result than #2. She became worse and worse until her fail in the French Open, dropping from #6 to #20.--GoPTCN 18:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • She never achived #2 except in 2007--GoPTCN 17:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2010
  • As the top seed due to Serena Williams and Safina's withdrawal (it would be nice to know if this was the first time or when the first time was)--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I delinked many links.--GoPTCN 14:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In this section you finally present a lot of seeding info. However, it is inconsistent with earlier sections although I like the added detail.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will try to add more seeding information in the previous sections.--GoPTCN 16:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • For a woman who spent 27 weeks of her career as the number 2 ranked player in the world, but never was number 1, I think it is important to attempt to point out her first and last number 1 seed and a count of number 1 seeds if possible.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. First was in Bali, 2006; last was in New Haven, 2009.--GoPTCN 14:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2011
  • The match was the longest recorded women's Grand Slam match in the Open Era, with a final scoreline of 6–4, 1–6, 16–14, and the second-longest women's match in the Open Era. - I think there is a link for longest matches and some have articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:13, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2012
Fed Cup
Coaches
Appearances in video games
  • This section needs to be beefed up. Maybe it can be expanded by merger. Does she have any prominent endorsements? Does she do anything else notable off the court?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:54, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your hard work gives me confidence that this review might succeed in a short period of time. I am officially putting this on hold.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review of progress[edit]

  • I would still like clarification on which weeks she was #3 in doubles in order to show how many weeks she was ranked #3.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about now?--GoPTCN 18:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • As before, please specifically identify the weeks she rose to and fell from her highest rank. In this case, I think you need two pairs of dates. This will give us a total of number of weeks at her highest rank.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I count 8 weeks at number 3 (7 consecutive) not 5.
  • You are correct. Done.
  • Now, I want to go back and check her singles and see that we did not include the final week's date for her #2 singles ranking.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:53, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I counted 15 weeks--GoPTCN 20:59, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two issues. 1.) I count 24 weeks if she fell in the week of February 24. 2.) Oddly she attained #2 on a Sunday and you say she lost the ranking on a Monday. Don't those come out on a regular cycle (the same day every week)?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know, sorry. --GoPTCN 14:33, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rankings are always published on Mondays, reflecting the results of the prior week.--Wolbo (talk) 14:48, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like clarification if the victory over Anastasia Myskina in 2003 was the best (highest opponent) up to that point in her career.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I stated that it was her highest up to that point.--GoPTCN 18:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The third point is not a dealbreaker.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:12, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am also not pressing for a mixed doubles record.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:27, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great work. Good Luck in the WP:CUP. I am going to pass this.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Svetlana_Kuznetsova/GA4&oldid=1051730375"