Biography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

There are no credible allegations against Mauresmo and there never have been. End of story. Metamagician3000 03:18, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Once again, I suggest that other users work on creating a balanced article rather than revert warring over trivia. Whatever happens in today's final in Beijing will be much more notable than this stuff - indeed her wins over Serena Williams in the US Open and Lindsay Davenport in Beijing are now more topical, since these are the players who have done most to block her success in the past. There is endless trivia to be added but not everything topical at a particular time is encyclopedic. Metamagician3000 04:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're not "suggesting." You're dictating. You changed factual aspects of the article, that in your opinion are "trivia," without discussing it first. And now you're all upset about the reversion of your changes. You want to discuss the "trivia"; yet, your initial changes and subsequent reversions indicate that you are insisting on the changes. I'm reverting your changes pending a meaningful discussion of them. That's only fair to the many users who have worked on the article since the last time you contributed to it on July 26, 2006. Tennis expert 05:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]