Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 WTA Finals – Singles


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Mandraketennis (talk) 19:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

2021 WTA Finals – Singles

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Lacking main source of the page: the link to the single draw. The one present is a dead link not even opening a page. Mandraketennis (talk) 20:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Huge Keep - you have got to be kidding right. This is so notable it isn't even funny. There's articles for the WTA singles event every single year. Fix the source if it's broken, but it's frivolous to call for a deletion. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Huge Keep - this is absolutely ridiculous now. The page contains a link to a PDF document, from the WTA website, that contains the draw.
 * Speedy Keep Ridiculous nomination { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 21:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennis-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:20, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Obvious and speedy keep - per WP:NOTCLEANUP. Notable article. This seems simply disruptive behavior from the proposer after not getting their way in a recent discussion.--Wolbo (talk) 21:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Huge Keep This is absolute blasphemy nominating numerous tennis articles for deletion. Especially a WTA Finals one. There is plenty of sources to backup notability for this article and other one relates to it. Qwerty284651 (talk) 22:31, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per those above. Proposer needs to read WP:BEFORE. Sod25 (talk) 02:02, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * @Sod25 I, in fact, did read the whole page "article for deletion" and related pages before submitting this and the other 3 articles. At point 2 it's enlisted the reasons to put an article up for deletion, and i quote, "The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)."

So, while ALL the USERS above have read only the first mentioned point Notability, i have read all the 4 points, and found that 2 of them, verifiability and reliable sources, are not met in this article. The general consensus made-up above is apparently built on a false premise, that article deletion should be waged ONLY against notability, while the WP:BEFORE page clearly states that it is one of four. I hope every future comment will adhere to what is written in the guidelines of Wikipedia and not to some sort of agreement among editors, if not to general laziness to stop at the first mentioned reason mentioned for deleting articles. I really hope that is not the case, because i cannot imagine what the "internal" consensum could have reduced the other main guidelines, instead of applying what is clearly stated in there. I would also like to point out that user @spiderone made a suspicious number of cross-posting, 3 in a minute, which could be considered canvassing, and the two users above @wolbo and @fyunck could be maybe considered as vote-stacking, since they already undid some of my editings and were against a recent proposal of mine, @fyunck in particular was duly present in that previous discussion raising constantly arguments against it and mischaracterizing the proposal, so for sure they were not "a priori" in favor of anything coming from me. While writing otherwise in here, that the article had good coverage.. is notable and so on, the 2 users above @wolbo and @fyunck have been searched for better links, recognizing that that was a big blunder, ending up uploading a link which i checked and in fact offers the Draw but only for semifinals and Finals, that is less than half of the tournament draw. As such the link uploaded, that i corrected with the correct caption "semi and finals draw", was undid and changed to "WTA draw", and eventually i changed it because it could lead to confusion to "WTA website draw". But it's still a link to a very partial draw which cannot resolve the issue here, so much so that none of the editors above in favor of kep the article has linked the change to me asking to retreat this Afd — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandraketennis Mandraketennis (talk) 03:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * For me, the original pdf link works fine. I'm not sure what the problem is. It might be a security issue but I think the link works if you open it in the browser separately as opposed to directly clicking on it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Strong keep: I've just added a direct link to the article for the Singles Draw from the official WTA site (I've added it to the general page for this tournament, as well). If someone can figure out how to do so for the Doubles Draw, as well - it's located at the same page, but is accessed by subsequently clicking upon 'Doubles' once there - and add those links to the two pages in question, this entire absurd "no reliable link to the draw was provided" argument can be put to bed.  The nomination of this article for potential deletion is ridiculous. –  AtypicalMale   — Preceding undated comment added 05:28, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Strongly Keep: This tournament is the fifth most important tournament in thea annual tour after four grand slams. I don't know why it is being considered for deletion. Abbasulu (talk) 18:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Saw the deletion notice and came here to see which idiot wants to delete the WTA Finals page. lol Ashish (talk) 11:19, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @JEnaashish94 i think this comment speaks for itself. A user who didn't even know what article he/she is talking about deserves no reply on the merit, he/she accomplished already to look as bad as he/she could in just one line.Mandraketennis (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @fyunck & @AtypicalMale I see the link of fyunck and it's not working (but that on the page is, strange technical personal issue for him, nothing to worry about in here). I don't understand what link AtypicalMale should have added. It's the same uploaded by Wolbo if i recall correctly. No new link since then.

And again, it redirects to the wtatennis website where it's showed only the semifinals and the final draw. That is to say, i need to put some number down, that link IGNORES, i.e. DOESN'T SHOW 12 of total 15 matches, but only 3 (three) matches!! A draw which doesn't show 80% of matches could not be considered a draw by any standard. We'll see what substandard some editor wishes to set here.Mandraketennis (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Mandraketennis But the reference link now provided from the WTA website shows the group stage, you click on each link contained in the group table to get the individual score. The individual match scores are provided on the PDF file. You literally do not have a leg to stand on.Alexxbrookss (talk) 14:26, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Alexxbrookss The link from the wta website point to a page (not a pdf file, in fact the "download draw" link on the upper right niche led to nowhere, but anyway let's get back to your point) where as i said above only 3 (future) matches: semifinals and finals are showed, in the usual draw format.

On its left there is a schematic view,a table to be red horizontally and vertically, of the two groups which sum up in a up to down, left to right template which could not be used to verify the score as it happens for all ordinary draw, (updated through the tournaments rounds) since it displays only the number of sets won per match, and not the games. Then on the right part, it switches back to the usual draw template. That is a monstrous draw, half one way and half another way. A substandard draw by any measure, a confusing template hard to read, incoherent, with a different scoring system, which switches to another template near the end of it. Not receivable.Mandraketennis (talk) 15:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * But this isn't a standard draw due to the round robin format. If you are going to take this line, you will have to delete all round robin competition pages. And if you download the PDF, you have to open it in Adobe Acrobat.Alexxbrookss (talk) 16:26, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Alexxbrookss and what about the round robin, then? Do they don't know what matches there will be? On the contrary they know very well and deeper than ordinary tournaments which matches are going to be played,... since the start!! So, the round robin is not an excuse for the tournament organizators not to upload an ordinary draw, they just thought to be "creative" developing a disaster of draw upon the group (to the point they don't even offer the score by game, but only by sets), generating that monstruosity of double template of draw, 80% one way, 20% the usual way we see on the wta pages. I know other round robin tournament are that way ( ATP Finals you're up), but if an usual (i'd say a coherent) draw is not possible, then no single & double page should be uploaded, wikipedia will have the main page for this year edition and people are free to go to the official website and trying to figure it out what exactly that cumbersome scheme with players names means. I don't see any problem with that. There are too much with uploading that monstruosity of draw on wiki, as i mentioned above.Mandraketennis (talk) 16:48, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * No, no, no. This is absolute insanity. Alexxbrookss (talk) 16:54, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * While taking a good look at the ATP Finals' draw (pretty much identical to the WTA Finals) i find out this link https://www.nittoatpfinals.com/en/official-programme/overview and by clicking on the pdf, there's a good draw template on page 51 for single, and on page 71 for double. If anyone is going to add a similar template and put a link to the score page of WTA Finals which will act as reliable and verifiable source for both the draw and for the score ( strong version), or eventually if only the score results page link is added (which will act as a weak verifiable page; weak version), i think i can withdraw the proposal for deletion. Or you can wait 7 days (or more days according to his backlog) when admin will show up to decide about keeping or deleting these pages. Mandraketennis (talk) 18:42, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Copy this link http://wtafiles.wtatennis.com/pdf/draws/2021/808/MDS.pdf into your browser, don't just click on it. It works fine. It may be a wikipedia issue or the newest Nov 1 update of adobe. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Withdraw I am still not convinced this official draw is up to the standard of the normal tournaments' draws, but seeing the improvements (pdf file available as per fyunck) and especially the work on the wta finals page on wiki to improve this bad template by inserting the score directly into it, i've decided to acknowledge all this efforts and to retreat the deletion.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.