Talk:2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles

Kyrgios withdrawal
We shouldn't include Kyrgios on the list of players who withdrew before the tournament began. He's already listed on the seeds, which would make the information redundant

He can't be compared with Struff, who withdrew before the draw was made, and was actually removed from the list of seeds, which moved everyone up and caused Ben Shelton to become seeded

(cc @Sashona)

Rubyaxles (talk) 04:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Ok thank you, understand your logic. Sashona (talk) 18:36, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Warwinka
Every year he plays Wawrinka attempting to make a Career Grand Slam.... but he has almost no chance. This is trivial stuff and should not be included. If he makes a final or semifinal, then it's newsworthy because he came close. And what is this every sentence is a new paragraph stuff? That's not correct writing unless you are learning in sentence structure in elementary school. We form cohesive paragraphs like every other encyclopedia. I'm not sure who keeps doing this stuff. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:49, 12 July 2023 (UTC)


 * @Fyunck(click), I was the one separating the paragraphs into smaller single-sentence paragraphs so it's easier to read, but after hearing you out I have reverted back. I replaced your opening paragraph with info on when the tournament took place with a main template, because it's not common practice to include event dates in draw articles. As for Wawrinka, the jury is still out on that one. Qwerty284651 (talk) 03:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah. I actually clumped another year from four to two paragraphs and then thought about it and made it into three paragraphs. I guess it depends on the device you read things on. On my desktop it's basically four or five sentences of one line in a row. On a phone each sentence probably takes up three or four lines of text. I guess my issue is that when we read a normal player's biography each paragraph is many sentences... and no one has complained about readability. This tournament and a few others was a paragraph per sentence. It looked weird on a desktop. And while I occasionally use my iphone to look something up on Wikipedia, I never edit with my phone. Sorry about the reverts then... I should have brought it here more quickly with my reasoning instead of just the summary. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:52, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem, Fyunck. I do agree. Reading the same article on PC and mobile will be a different experience as it varies from browser to browser, resolution, how much it's zoomed in and other factors, and consequently is different for each individual. Qwerty284651 (talk) 03:57, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Lead section
I tried to improve the lead section by adding an opening sentence but was reverted. The sentence I added (which was removed) was: "The gentlemen's singles tournament at the 2023 Wimbledon Championships is taking place between 3 and 16 July." It isn't perfect by any means and I'm sure it can be improved, but it is nevertheless a genuine attempt to introduce the topic, including relevant links. In contrast, "Novak Djokovic is the four-time defending champion." is a terrible opening sentence for an article - it is important information but shouldn't be the first sentence. I propose that my edit be restored (or improved upon). --Jameboy (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, it's a bit moot. What you added is best at "2023 Wimbledon Championships" not the Men's singles article. Probably sandwiched between the first two sentences as it now stands. It could be in this article in the top of the infobox. What will be the first sentence and paragraph is already determined. It will be "X defeated Y in the final (score) to win the gentlemen's singles tennis title at the 2023 Wimbledon Championships." Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:14, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Final page
I think it's safe to say that stunning final needs its own Wikipedia page. GHDmnespafro (talk) 18:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This one and probably 50 others. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed, but as this is so notable, and such a big moment ... I think it should be done as a matter of, you know, maybe urgency. GHDmnespafro (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This one is really notable only because it's brand new. 1972 and 1980 Wimbledons readily come to mind. So does 1988 US Open. Moments that were just as big. I'm not saying this doesn't deserve it, just that the list of great matches is long. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)