Talk:Amélie Mauresmo: Difference between revisions
74.56.220.219 (talk) No edit summary |
Metamagician3000 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:Relevant? They're completely unsubstantiated, comming mostly from homophobia. You could write down "Some people are jerks towards Mauresmo because they're insecure.", that's much more relevant. [[User:BKmetic|BKmetic]] 15:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC) |
:Relevant? They're completely unsubstantiated, comming mostly from homophobia. You could write down "Some people are jerks towards Mauresmo because they're insecure.", that's much more relevant. [[User:BKmetic|BKmetic]] 15:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC) |
||
::There are no credible allegations against Mauresmo and there never have been. End of story. [[User:Metamagician3000|Metamagician3000]] 03:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
==Trivia== |
|||
There is far too much trivia relating to 2006 accruing here. I intend to keep weeding it out to try to keep the article in some sort of proportion. In particular, it is not helpful to someone who wants to know about Mauresmo to be told that she could have returned to number one a week earlier if she'd won a particular match back in March 2006 or whatever. That was of topical interest at the time, but such interest does not last forever. As of tomorrow she'll have held down the number one racking for the 28th consecutive week. Try to keep a sense of proportion rather than being focused on events in the relatively recent past that were topical for only a very brief time. It would be better for more people to go back and put in useful information about the last few years, rather than keeping every tiny factoid about 2006. (I am responsible for the current structure of headings, etc., and I can see plenty of scope to expand and improve the material under the earlier headings.) [[User:Metamagician3000|Metamagician3000]] 03:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 03:18, 24 September 2006
| Biography | ||||
| ||||
Steroid allegations?
While I don't think this page should spend too much text on the issue, I think that the allegations that Mauresmo may have used steroids are relevant. The previous attempt at doing this got reverted away. Does anyone have thoughts about how to do this well? --Rkstafford 18:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Don't bother mate, the wiki nazis that work round the clock supressing information they don't like will only revert it.
- Relevant? They're completely unsubstantiated, comming mostly from homophobia. You could write down "Some people are jerks towards Mauresmo because they're insecure.", that's much more relevant. BKmetic 15:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- There are no credible allegations against Mauresmo and there never have been. End of story. Metamagician3000 03:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Trivia
There is far too much trivia relating to 2006 accruing here. I intend to keep weeding it out to try to keep the article in some sort of proportion. In particular, it is not helpful to someone who wants to know about Mauresmo to be told that she could have returned to number one a week earlier if she'd won a particular match back in March 2006 or whatever. That was of topical interest at the time, but such interest does not last forever. As of tomorrow she'll have held down the number one racking for the 28th consecutive week. Try to keep a sense of proportion rather than being focused on events in the relatively recent past that were topical for only a very brief time. It would be better for more people to go back and put in useful information about the last few years, rather than keeping every tiny factoid about 2006. (I am responsible for the current structure of headings, etc., and I can see plenty of scope to expand and improve the material under the earlier headings.) Metamagician3000 03:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)