Talk:ATP 250 tournaments

Somewhat crazy number for this article
The Masters 1000 events have had many names since 1990... Championship Series, Super 9, Tennis Masters Series, ATP Masters Series, etc. But through all those name changes we carry over Masters victories from one name to the next. Federer has won 27 through four name changes. That's how we have always marked things since it is the same level. Why on earth through its four name changes does the 250 level events have multiple stops and starts with player victories? Someone like Tsonga, should have 13 victories in 250 level events, not 1 and 11 and 1. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:53, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I think we should either re-tally all the events, starting from 2000, or just remove all the tally numbers like the ATP Tour 500 page does. Also, is there a reason why pre-2000 events are not tallied in this page?--Ui56k (talk) 00:51, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

New ATP 250 logo
The old version ATP 250 logo need to changes. --Chinyen Lu (talk) 04:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If we had a new non-copyrighted image, we would. Right now the old is better than nothing. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

New Page for ATP 250 Finals?
This article is pretty large, especially with the ATP 250 finals section that I added a few months ago. The flag templates aren't loading properly. Would it make sense for someone to create a new article for ATP 250 finals?Xc4TNS (talk) 17:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

This article is so big it is causing technical problems
See Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded and Template limits for technical details.

Common solutions include:
 * Removing flags from competitors if they are competing as individuals "as individuals" and not representing a country, see MOS:FLAG for appropriate use of flag icons.
 * Splitting the article
 * Removing content
 * Redoing the brackets, tables, or both so the article has less HTML in the resulting web page

The simplest thing to do would be to split off the 2009-2018 content to make an article called (currently a redirect) similar in spirit to ATP International Series.

If this is done, be sure to use copied, split article, or a similar template on BOTH this article's talk page and the new article's talk page to comply with Wikipedia's attribution policy. See Copying within Wikipedia for details.

This page is layed out similar to ATP Tour Masters 1000 and ATP Tour 500 so any major changes to the layout should be done across all 4 articles even though those pages are not hitting Wikipedia's page limits.

Other than temporary fixes to get the page down to less than 2MB, changes should be discussed for at least a week first.

Pinging recent editors:.

davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  17:40, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Strange. It's the same size as our George Washington article and no one says there are issues with that. It's only 3/5s the size of our Roger Federer career statistics article and no problem there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I think that whole section on "Singles finals" is overkill and should be removed. It is probably the big problem as it uses the same template over and over and over. That is what causes issues. The flags are within the parameters of Wikipedia guidelines, but I always thought they weren't needed every single time once they were established for a player. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:26, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I temporarily deleted the new "Singles finals" section and this article disappeared from the error list. That is the culprit here so it should be deleted as overly detailed or a new article should be spun off. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:09, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's wait a week or so before making a permanent decision. If nobody objects, I'd be fine just ditching that material altogether.  However, I don't know enough about tennis-related articles on Wikipedia to know if that material is considered "encyclopedic" or not.  If it is, it needs to be kept in some form.  That said, a temporary deletion of that section with a note in the edit summary pointing to this discussion and a note here saying it's a temporary emergency measure would be okay.  If anyone objects, they can and should revert the removal. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  22:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, you'll notice right above your added section here, the person who created the "Singles finals" section already posted worries about it's inclusion under "New Page for ATP 250 Finals?". So if it is worthy of keeping (which I'm iffy about) it will need to be spun off as a new article. You temporary measure is not a bad idea and it will allow discussion on the final solution. Let's see what any of the pinged editors think today. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Not seeing any new posts today, I removed the newer section causing loading issues and mentioned this talk page section in the edit summary. This way the page will load properly while we figure out what to do. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Do we really need to keep recording every ATP 250 winner ever in this article? I mean, that is an exercise that goes on forever. The article will inevitably become to large to be useful even without the templates. Surely in the individual articles on the ATP World tour seasons already sufficiently provide this information? I would rather model this article after ATP World Tour and focus on an extensive readable prose explanation of the concept and its history.Tvx1 23:21, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Isn't the same thing as ATP Tour Masters 1000 and ATP Tour 500 where we record every winner? Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:17, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * True. And my arguments apply to those as well.Tvx1 20:02, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I would really disagree with the Masters 1000 events. We do it for the four Majors and the Olympics get articles that list all winners in a discipline. I think the 1000 events are pretty darned important. The 500 and 250 events not so much and it's why we don't have them in performance timelines either. You can see when this article started it was simply a list of the current tournaments along with the current champion. It should have stayed that way with a whole bunch of added prose. But it looks like in 2013 an editor expanded it a great deal. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

As the creator of the ATP 250 finals section, I feel this is justified. My main reason for creating this section was for the sake of continuity with other pages such as the Masters 1000, 500 and International Series page.

That being said though, I don’t see the point of spin of articles like the ATP Masters Series, International Series Gold and International Series pages if the inclusion of finals stops. What is the difference between tournaments pre and post 2009?. They only serve as pages where data can be split into generational categories with the finals on this page being from 2009 onwards. The tournaments have merely changed names but are the same category since 1990. These pages may as well be merged if people are questioning including the finals in them.

It would make sense to include the finals for 500’s and Masters 1000’s but only on new pages specifically named “ATP Tour Masters 1000 Finals” or “ATP Tour 500 Finals” as those tournaments are bigger, especially the Masters 1000 events. As for the 250's, it’s up to everyone else but as I’ve already created a list of finals it wouldn’t hurt making a “ATP 250 Finals” page.--Xc4TNS (talk) 18:36, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't have a preference one way or the other as long as the resulting page does not come close to Wikipedia's technical limits and is not expected to come close any time soon. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  19:32, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Editor Tvx1 wasn't just talking about the finals. He said the entire list of winners is trivial, and I tend to agree. The nine 1000 level events are about the limit of including every winner in an article, let alone the full final. This article far too detailed in my book. We don't need a list of every tournament's final on one page. We don't need a list of every tournament winner either. We need 1) Prose describing the formation of the 250 levels events and its past iterations. This prose should include point and money values, historical information and differences between these and 500 level events. We need 2) a list of current and past tournaments with links to their articles which DO have the finals and scores. And 3) we need some statistical important records for these lower tiered 250 level events. That's about it as the rest is window dressing that is actually unwieldy to read through. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:49, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, I do see the perspective you’re coming from. These pages are rather bloated. That being said though, with the data already there I don’t think it’s necessary to completely remove all the winners. 250 events might be small but they are part of the highest tier tour in men’s tennis and have been around for awhile so having external data outside of just individual tournament pages and ATP Tour season pages might come in handy for those wanting to check past winners of these events. But yeah, I do believe at least that this page doesn’t need to be overly bloated and all info from the previous editions of the same category such as the International Series needs to be on this page. Also, it might seem a fairly small issue but is the series from 2019 onwards known simply as ATP 250 or ATP Tour 250?. There doesn’t seem to be any official name. ATP 250 does seem to be on the ATP calendar so will it be necessary to rename this page?.--Xc4TNS (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It is necessary to remove all the winners here. This section was started because it became apparent that this article simply cannot technically handle listing all the winners. We simply cannot keep listing all winners of every ATP 250 that will ever be held in one article.Tvx1 16:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

2024 Țiriac Open is missing
hi, 2024 Țiriac Open is missing from the table. Ritai (talk) 23:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)