Talk:Tennis

This article focuses too much on early 20th century tennis and not enough (if at all) on later tennis players. --Charles Sandberg 20:48, 9 June 2007 (CDT)

Moving it along now...

In my reading, for what's its worth, this article is fantastic, approval worthy. Can we involve an editor here? Stephen Ewen 15:37, 23 October 2007 (CDT)

Well, if you think so, great! There are apparently some Sports Editors but, as far as I can tell, they have never contributed 50 cents worth of stuff to our efforts. Maybe they should be de-Editorized and some new ones found. If *this* article could be Approved, I might have the energy to spend some serious time with Pancho Gonzales and Bill Tilden, both of which have an enormous amount of material in them, but mostly in the ghastly WP format, which, however, I have revised to a certain degree. If these articles could be revised to any useful purpose, and then approved, I'll be happy to do it. If they're just going to languish, however.... Hayford Peirce 00:57, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

Court image

For me, it's a total no-go. Roger federer is on the upper left, the TOC on the right (which is fine), but the court image is smack dab in the middle of the page with a huge gap under Rog. Fixed with a handful of BRses. --Robert W King 00:52, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

LOLOLOL, would this be with the Mickey Mouse Browser ver. 7.0 ? --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 01:05, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

?? IE 6.0 sp2 =\, but it looks "ok" now (I hope!). Oh and I do an excellent Mickey Mouse impersonation. --Robert W King 01:19, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

For the record it looks fine in Firefox too.

The court vs. The lines

Why italics on one but not the other? Hayford Peirce 11:58, 25 October 2007 (CDT)

caption says "today"

It might be more helpful to say "in 2007" instead of "today", because eventually, Roger Federer will be supplanted. It's good to write the article using phrases that are specific and do not assume "today" is 2007.Pat Palmer 15:05, 29 October 2007 (CDT)

Yes, I *did* think about that, several times, even. If he had just been the best player for this *single* year I would have used the date. Since he's been dominant for, what?, 4 or 5 years now, I thought "today" better describes him. I'm also pretty sure that there's enough interest in, and vigilance over, this article, that when R.F. is no longer the best, the caption will rapidly be changed by someone. Or maybe even the picture will be changed. Hayford Peirce 15:12, 29 October 2007 (CDT)

Tennis in art: a category?

Nabokov has an extended treatment of tennis in Part II of Lolita; also John Updike has a memorable, detailed tennis scene in Chapter i in The Witches of Eastwick. Hitchcock created a very memorable tennis scene in Strangers on a Train. Woody Allen's recent Match Point features a main character who is an ex-tennis player. And so on. Or is this simply flippant and beside the point? Jeffrey Scott Bernstein 17:35, 30 October 2007 (CDT)

If we have a Butlers in Art, Tennis in Art sounds good to me. Stephen Ewen 18:01, 30 October 2007 (CDT)