Wikipedia

Talk:1979 Stella Artois Championships

Latest comment: 6 years ago by DrStrauss in topic Requested move 26 July 2017
Learn more about this page

Dead link edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 26 July 2017 edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago13 comments6 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus DrStrauss talk 17:41, 23 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

– General Wikipedia policy appears to be to go by the longstanding and traditional name of a tournament or event for internal consistency, rather than to go by the name of temporary sponsors. The name of this championship changed in 2009 and order to avoid confusion with the casual reader the consistent and well known name should be used, in this case Queen's Club Championship. While sponsors come and go the base name remains, and that is the name year on year this tournament has been referred to ubiquitously with the sponsor name. For avoidance of confusion and internal consistency, this should be the un-sponsored name. Sport and politics (talk) 17:50, 26 July 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. EvertonFC13(talk2me) 19:52, 8 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Survey edit

  • Comment - I'm not sure about this. Yes, for the tournament name we almost always go with the non-sponsored name as we do with Queen's Club Championships, Indian Wells Masters, Washington Open, etc. Because sponsors change on a regular basis we go with the common name or original name of the event. This helps our readers and stops us from have to change the name of an event every year. But the individual yearly event with the particular sponsor will never change. The "1988 Stella Artois Championships – Doubles" would never change since that was the official event name in 1988. All our tournaments work in this same manner, with the official sponsor name only being used for the individual year. Those articles should link back to the non-sponsored tournament name. There could also be a redirect to these sponsored yearly events... ""1988 Stella Artois Championships – Doubles" could have a redirect of ""1988 Queen's Club Championships – Doubles", but I doubt that would be used as a search term by many readers. I'm not saying we can't do it your way where we would change the lead senetence to say something like "This version of the Queen's Club Championships was officially named the "1988 Stella Artois Championships", but I'm not sure these multiple moves are necessary. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
The best example I can give is from football where the lead line is for example: "The 1998–99 Football League Cup (known as the Worthington Cup for sponsorship reasons)". This can very easily be done here, and Sponsor names fade with time. The un-sponsored name will not fade with time. WHen referring to historic tournaments both names are likely to be used, with the older the tournament being referred to as the un-sponsored name.
  • Weak support – It looks illogical that yearly tournaments have a different title than the tournament series. However I'm not sure how dominant the sponsor name was in contemporary sources. Was the event widely known as "Queen's Club Championships" in the 1980s and 1990s or did the then-sponsor name dominate headlines? — JFG talk 21:11, 26 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
    I can only go by memory in answering. Anything official at the time was "Stella Artois Championships". But anytime you'd catch any results on the news it was usually in the mode of "Boris Becker is into the quarterfinals at Queen's." Examples are 1986 LA Times (Queen's only), Washington Post (both), but also 1991 Getty Images (Stella). Also 1995 Sampras (Queens) but 1994 Sampras (both). Before sponsors became the norm 1970s and before at would have simply been called Queens Club such as in the book that talks of the 1966 Emerson/Roche walkover. And since announcers were often tennis players themselves, they would only call it Queens. Today it is much more common to hear the sponsor name such as BNP Paribas Open instead of Indian Wells Open. But even in this day and age, when talking generally about the entire event, sports giant ESPN will tend to call it Queen's Club. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
    But it is still a fact that the 2017 version was called the "2017 Aegon Championships" and the 1988 version was called the "1988 Stella Artois Championships." So that would be more precise and truthful. And those years will never change. The problems we had a decade ago were that when a tournament got new sponsors, editors would change the title of the main article. So it would change from the "Stella Artois Championships" to the "Aegon Championships." But doing it that way made it seem like the 1988 version was also sponsored by Aegon. So we went with the generic (but sourcable) common non-sponsored name for all tournament main articles. Yearly tournament articles we were never strict about any kind of enforcement at Wikipedia Tennis Project. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment – It may be useful for participants in this discussion to read WP:OFFICIAL and WP:COMMONNAME titling guidelines again. In a nutshell, if commentary about a subject uses a "common name" more than the "official name", the article title should reflect the common name. This position would tend to favour the moves, but that needs to be backed up by sources, both contemporary and retrospective. Queen Anne of Romania was never a queen, yet her article is titled this way because she was mostly known by this honorific during their life. — JFG talk 04:57, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
    But in the last 5-10 years I'm not 100% sure which term is used more often by commentators. If it's on Tennis Channel I would almost bet that they more often say "here we are at the Aegon Championships at Queens Club." Or even "so and so has just won the Aegon Trophy." Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:49, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Oh, looks like commenters got beaten on the head hard enough!   — JFG talk 05:51, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Please note that WP:COMMONNAME does not say we should use the name that is most commonly used in commentary about the subject. It says (roughly) we should use the name that is most commonly used in independent reliable commentary about the subject. Independence is important, since sources that are affiliated with a topic very often enforce official naming and styling guidance for promotional purposes. Sponsorship-related naming of events, buildings, etc., clearly has a promotional purpose, and event operators not only use promotional names in their self-published material, but also commonly try to force other sources to use their preferred naming as a condition for access to information or program content or advertising dollars. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Exactly right, that is the whole point. Sport and politics (talk) 12:52, 12 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Yes, the announcer probably will say "here we are at the Aegon Championships at Queens Club" and "so and so has just won the Aegon Trophy", because they are paid to say that. They wouldn't be allowed to broadcast from the event if they didn't agree to use the promotional name. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. Too many articles, too little evidence, too little benefit. Set up redirects for alternative titles, and consider some more modest proposal(s) if there are any significantly damaging misnames... which seems doubtful. But very glad to see the relevant policy and on-topic essay both cited above. Andrewa (talk) 00:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1979_Stella_Artois_Championships&oldid=1196189393"