Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Suzanne Lenglen/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 28 January 2021 [1].


Nominator(s): Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Suzanne Lenglen, one of the first global superstars of tennis. Lenglen was virtually unbeatable, winning 287 out of the final 288 matches of her career. She gained immense popularity through her balletic playing style and vibrant personality, and first drew attention to herself by winning a World Championship tournament a few weeks after turning 15 years old. Her popularity forced Wimbledon to move to a new venue more than twice the size of the previous one to accommodate all of the fans who wanted to see her play. While still in her prime, Lenglen spurned amateur tennis to turn professional. She was the first top amateur player to turn professional, kickstarting the professional era. In one year of professional tours, Lenglen made more money than Babe Ruth in the year Ruth hit a record-setting 60 home runs.

A former featured article from the Stone Age of FAC reviews, this is your chance to get a former FA back to featured status and to review one of the most vital articles in tennis history. If passed, this would be my third FA; here are the first two: Kim Clijsters (also tennis) and Erin Phillips (Australian football). Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit

I think resolved, but not confirmed yet. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not resolved yet. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Amakuru

edit
  • Early life and background:
    • "Several years after Suzanne was born, her father sold the omnibus business and relocated the family to Marest-sur-Matz near Compiègne in northern France in 1904" - were the selling of the business and the relocation separate events? If so, it would be worth separating them out so it's clear. And if they're actually part of the same event, then we should chop either "Several years after..." or "in 1904", since both indicate a point in time.
    • "Nice Lawn Tennis Club" - we have an article for this, so link to it
    • "loved to play diabolo" - it may be just me, but "loved to" doesn't quite sound like formal encyclopedic language. Is that what the sources says? Could consider "enjoyed" instead.
    • "through attending tournaments on the Riviera where the world's best players" - a comma after Riviera might help the flow a bit here.
    • "the world's best players would compete" - just "the world's best players competed" would be preferable.
    • "Having played the sport recreationally in the past, he bought Lenglen a racket from a toy store" - are his playing in the past and the fact that he bought her the racket specifically linked? If not, could either split it up, or rephrase to something like "He had played the sport recreationally in the past, and he bought..." or similar.
    • "to practice with friends" - since the article is tagged as British English, this should be "to practise", I believe.
    • "She quickly showed enough skill for tennis to convince her father to get her a proper racket within a month" - was the previous racket not a proper one then? Toy stores might also sell such things, so if the previous one was actually a toy then maybe say so. Also, should be "skill at tennis"?
    • "Three months later in September, Lenglen" - a comma after "later" I think, as "in September" is an appositive phrase.
    • "a proper tennis court" - second use of "proper" this paragraph... not totally convinced it's an encyclopedic word, and could change at least one of them to something else.
      • I feel like alternatives (e.g. real, actual) would be less encyclopedic. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 05:46, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Well, yes. Real and actual don't improve things much. But all these words seem quite vague to me. I might say to my kids "this is a proper tennis court", but I wouldn't expect to say it in a formal letter. What was the real difference between the "improper" rackets and courts and the "proper" ones that she moved on to? Maybe defined in terms of their being to official standards or something. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        For the racket, the first one was from a toy store (and not intended for serious use) and the second one was from a tennis manufacturer. For the court, one of the differences is that the first one was grass and the second one was clay, which was ubiquitous in France for tennis courts at the time (and still is, I think). But the real big difference was that for the first one, I think her father just drew the lines himself. The grass was also just the grass in their backyard; it wasn't designed to be used as a tennis court (maybe it wasn't even flat, for instance). (Like... you can kick a football in your backyard with the garage marked as a net, but that doesn't mean your backyard counts as a football pitch.) Sportsfan77777 (talk) 07:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • "the singles handicap event" - a link might be useful, to aid readers in understanding what this is
    • "towards the end of the fall" - "autumn" in British English
    • "They only showed restraint in their criticisms when she was sick, leading to Lenglen becoming comfortable with being ill" - I'm not quite sure what this means. Did she fake illness in order to avoid their criticism?
  • 1912-13: Maiden titles:
  • More to follow! I'm impressed with the article so far anyway, so I'm likely to support.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1914: World Hard Court champion:
  • World War I hiatus:
    • Can't see any issues here.
  • 1919: Classic Wimbledon final:
    • "in the challenge round" - although we've already introduced the "challenge round" concept, we're generally calling the event "the final" in this section, so would make sense to clarify
      • I think the statement from the 1914 section establishes that the challenge round is the final: "The format gave the defending champion a bye until the final match, known as the challenge round." Sportsfan77777 (talk) 06:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1920: Olympic champion:
  • More to follow.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only singles defeat post-World War I:
    • No issues with this section at all, looks great.
  • Start of 179-match win streak:
    • "and only lost twelve points" - change to "and lost only twelve points"? Not sure why, but as above this rings better.
    • "who had defaulted against her in the United States" - wondering if this is really necessary here... we know that she defaulted from above, and it's not directly relevant to Lenglen's easy win the following year. Up to you though.
    • "to end Lenglen's amateur career" - this sounds slightly odd, as if it was the streak which ended her career. Could maybe consider "which lasted for the remainder of he amateur career" or similar.
  • 1923: Career-best 45 titles:
  • 1924: No major titles:
    • "she also did not win a major tournament in a year where majors were held for the first time since 1913" - the wording here is quite confusing. Initially I thought this was saying that there had been no major tournaments played since 1913, and it was only when I noticed that this did not tally with the mention of Wimbledon in previous paragraphs that I figured out the real meaning!
  • 1925: Open French champion
    • The lead uses the terminology "Open French champion", but the body does not use this exact term. Presumably "open" means open to international players in this context (in contrast to the now-replaced usage of open to mean a non-handicap event earlier in the article). Maybe match up the title and the wording in the body somehow?
      • I changed the "non-handicap" from "open" to "standard" above because I don't think "open" is actually used that way. "open" is commonly used to indicate "open to internationals". I was hoping that was clear from "the inaugural edition open to international players". The title is really "open French champion", but the "open" is capitalized because it's the first word. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1926: Match of the Century
    • "retiring" - is this the correct terminology? Moving from amateur to prefessional wouldn't seem like a retirement to me, but I guess if that's what everyone says...
    • "After the linesman clarified the shot was good and a delay of at least several minutes to clear the court" - the two parts of this conjunction seem to be a verb and a noun respectively, which doesn't sound correct. Probably best to change to "After the linesman's clarification that the shot was good and a delay..."
    • "Wills's season was cut short when she needed to have her appendix removed following her second round victory at the French Championships"
  • More to follow.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:16, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • United States tour (1926-27):
    • "an offer of 200,000 francs to turn professional in America" - (1) this should probably be either "the US" or "the United States"; (2) is there a reason why she was offered a francs contract the previous time, but a $ contract this time?
    • "The singles matches were almost best-of-three sets" - should this be "almost all"?
    • "after Lenglen became ill and had decided to play" - mixture of tenses here... should be either "after Lenglen had become ill and decided to play..." or "after Lenglan became ill and decided to play..."
    • "an attendance of 13000" - should have a comma in the number as it's five digits per MOS:DIGITS. Ditto "10000".
      • Done.
    • "from ticket sales between $1.50 and $5.50" - doesn't seem to quite scan. Maybe change to "sales of tickets priced at" or similar.
      • Done.
  • British tour (1927):
  • Aftermath:
  • Lenglen vs. Mallory:
  • Lenglen and Ryan:
  • OK, will pause again there. This is a long article to get through! Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Fashion:

Placeholder for TRM

edit

Nice work, I'll add some comments in due course. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:34, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note

edit

This has been open for more than four weeks and has only one support. I have added it to Urgents, but unless it picks up more interest over the next two or three days it will have to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would the support(s) and review(s) carry over if they were completed and I need to renominate? Sportsfan77777 (talk) 18:45, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid not. Although my experience is that reviewers are happy to re-review - they don't like to see their initial review "wasted". Gog the Mild (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am regretfully archiving this. After nearly five weeks it has attracted little interest. The two weeks wait before renomination will not apply. However, Sportsfan77777 can I suggest having some willing, and preferably experienced, reviewers lined up when it next appears here. Call in some favours, or perhaps do a few more FAC reviews to accumulate some favours.
Okay, thanks for waving the two-week requirement! I'll try to find reviewers. I've done that before (and it's worked), but I didn't do it this time because I'm not really in any rush. (I don't have anything else to nominate.) Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.