Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Tennis

WP:DELSORT/TennisWP:DELSORT/Tennis

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Tennis. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Tennis|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Tennis. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Tennis/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Tennis

Daria Lodikova

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tennis player with a highest singles ranking of 296 and doubles of 397. All the sourcing is passing mentions in drawsheets, results pages and articles about other players. At the previous AFD in 2023 this was draftified for better sourcing to be found but that has not happened and I am unable to find anything substantial. I strongly suggest editors read the previous AFD discussion before voting. Fails SIGCOV and should be deleted. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sportspeople, Women, Tennis, and Russia. Anxioustoavoid (talk) 17:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If it was TOOSOON in 2023 and now in 2025 she's either 296th or 500 and something... She's not notable. Lack of any sort of sourcing reinforces that fact. Oaktree b (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gsearch only brings up match websites or the WTA. She's 400th something now, if that helps... Very non-notable. Oaktree b (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Made her WTA Tour debut after qualifying for the main draw of the 2025 Iași Open singles main draw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vecihi91 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles final

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Tennis Project Guidelines say we only create match articles of "matches of record-setting events or matches with significant controversies." Individual major match finals are only supposed to be created when the press describes it as one of the greatest of all-time. Routine matches like this one do not have the same extra notability. This a run-of-the-mill four-set Wimbledon final. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Tennis, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:05, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is the same issue for the 2024 Wimbledon Championships Men's Singles final page, not notable at all and a run of the mill match, should also be deleted. A page doesn't need to made for every final played. Reaper1945 (talk) 19:02, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not as notable or epic as their French Open final showdown a month earlier. Avatar5991 (talk) 03:24, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not violate any policy of Wikipedia, and does not meet the deletion criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.172.183.76 (talk) 06:03, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles final

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

We aren't supposed to create final match articles for every major.... (8x per year for singles). It is supposed be for those matches that are considered the most amazing of all time. This was 6–0, 6–0 for goodness sake, an abysmal match! One player barely showed up. All of this can easily fit on 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles... most already is there. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennis-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:53, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Are there any policies or guidelines relating to this deletion nomination? Thincat (talk) 20:09, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What usually happens per Tennis Project would be we start with a player bio and when that gets too unwieldy we split off a player stats article. With something like Wimbledon we have the Wimbledon Championships article, yearly articles like 2025 Wimbledon Championships, and then articles on the specific yearly discipline such as 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles. That is normal for all tennis tournaments including the four Grand Slam tournaments. Sometimes we include a truly special match that has many sources as one of the greatest of all-time, such as 2012 Australian Open – Men's singles final. This match was 6–0, 6–0. Anisimova was absolutely awful.... nerves and out of gas per her press briefings. Why on earth would we have a stand-alone article on that? There's nothing to see but a train wreck. However, Tennis Project Guidelines tell us: Notability - "If it's a match: Matches that deserve their own articles on Wikipedia are those that have received significant coverage compared to other tennis matches at a similar level, such as matches of record-setting events or matches with significant controversies." While this match was a record, only three major finals in 148 years of tennis have been 6–0, 6–0, it's on the bad side. The other two double bagel matches do not have such articles. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:17, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd say this match should not have a separate article per those guidelines. This match did not get considerably more significant coverage than other matches of the tournament like say the semifinals or even the doubles final.T v x1 10:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:49, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge No reason this can't be covered in 2025 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles. Being the final match does not inherently mean it needs a standalone article. Reywas92^Talk 05:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unneccesary content fork.T v x1 10:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Would've said delete if this were a routine GS final, but, as pointed out above, this was only the third double-bagel GS final in tennis history, so it likely meets the notability criteria and therefore warrant a page, subject to the quality of the article. Unfortunately, the current version does not satisfy this standard. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:30, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The scoreline alone does not justify the article. The amount of independent coverage does and this final just didn’t get that much. T v x1 21:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which is what I said "subject to the quality of the article". Unnamelessness (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it does meet the notability criteria regardless of the quality. A scoreline does not determine whether it meets these guidelines. Coverage does. This is why we don’t have an article on the Graf Zvereva final either… T v x1 08:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Objection to deletion proposition

This page should not be deleted, for those reasons:

First, this is clearly not a common or normal final if only three major finals ended with 6/ 6/0, so it is impossible to even consider as that, if this is a massive rare occurrence

Second, it featured two players that never had reached the Wimbledon final, so it is an first time occurrence and again not just like any other final

Third, the allegations of “ We are creating final match articles for every major” is false. If you look up, you will find out that surprisingly the vast majority of articles about major finals are of the men’s singles draw and that there are only three about Women's singles finals, including this one and the use of the argument that “The other two double bagel matches do not have such articles” as a reason to delete can be easily dismissed because editors prefer most of the time to write about more recent events or events that have more easily accessible sources, those two finals fall exactly under that

Fourth, the match wad described by media as “the most one-sided final in 114 years”, so again a massive rare occurrence and with a source to back it up for it’s importance.

Fifth, several grand slam finals articles are on existence and many of them do not have any statements from the press describing as the greatest matches of all time or something similar and nobody is opposing their existence as separated articles.

last, merging with the article about the woman’s draw would make it a unnecessary long article and would “hide” those information, making harder to find for people that want to read about the final only Haddad Maia fan (talk) 18:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Haddad Maia Fan (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AFD. [reply]

Unfortunately, nothing of your statement is an argument per Wikipedia’s guidelines and policies justifying this article. T v x1 21:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While notable for only the third double bagel to occur in a Major final (and first since 1988), I don't think it warrants a standalone article. Avatar5991 (talk) 03:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]