Talk:Maria Sharapova

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.
This article is part of the "Tennis players" set of articles nominated for Version 0.7. Discuss this nomination, or see the set nominations page for more details.

Contents

[edit] Sharapova Grunting at 101.2 decibels

Actually, I searched over internet and I found out all the news sites (like bbc and Reuters) news about maria sharapova's grunting at 101.2 decibels in Wimbledon 2005 relies on an unofficial "gruntometer" of London Daily mail which is a tabloid newspaper and looks like invalid. Hence, I found it more journalistic rather than scientific and I do believe it is not appropriate as a statement in an encyclopedia like wikipedia. Indeed, it is technically difficult to measure the sound power in an offline manner (after the game is done and through the recorded tape which depends on the amplification value of recording). Therefore, I deleted the corresponding sentence from the article. Blacksosis (talk) 08:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


[edit] 2008 Australian Open sets

Do you think its worth mentioning that she's the first woman to win the AO without dropping a set since Lindsay Davenport in 2000? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.96.27 (talk) 14:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Endorsements & Fan Page

I have taken down a considerable portion of the Endorsements section seeing as this is an encyclopedia and not a magazine. I feel if you want to talk about her Endorsements you can without making a list of every single one. I also got rid of her Fan page. Since I find there is enough already in the external links section. I will continue to remove the Endorsements section as well if people keep adding itSatanical Eve (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation Comment True

The claim that her name is pronounced sharApova as opposed to sharapOva is true, despite the "citation needed" asterisk. I was on a bus with a Ukrainian woman the other day who explained that same phenomenon to me.

[edit] Product Endorsement

What does her product endorsement have to do with her tennis? Is this a marketing page or a player profile? You might as well go insert what type of toothpaste J.R.R. Tolkien used in his biography. Please keep the consumerism disease off wikipedia. I have deleted the section. User:RiverBlues|RiverBlues]] 01:58, 12 December 2007 (GMT)

[edit] ITF Titles

The article is already long, therefore, there is no need to refer to her ITF record. In addition, if listing her ITF titles, her junior career should also be included?

Many Wikipedia biographies of female professional tennis players list their ITF titles. An ITF title is hardly the equivalent of a junior title. Tennis expert 11:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Levine 'incident'

"In August 2007, the media reported that Maroon 5 singer Adam Levine made disparaging comments about Maria after ending a relationship with her.[4] However, a representative for Adam stated shortly afterwards that Adam never said these things and the two have only met one time at a birthday party.[5]"

I don't care enough to change this (and am not sure how it should be done), but it seems that whoever wrote it was unaware of the context. The 'media' referred to the Exile, a SATIRICAL Moscow-based newspaper. As in, like a Russian version of The Onion. So basically what hapenned was that they made up the story for comic effect and Levine's lawyer apparently took them seriously enough to write to them refuting it. If this belongs in the article at all, it should reflect all this; as it is now, it's misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baligant (talk • contribs) 07:58, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Fixed, A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.85.53 (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

This information is completely missing again from the main article. I feel it should be included in the personal life section with the fact that it did not happen and setting the facts straight on the matter, especially for those looking for the truth - they won't have the information necessary to know it was untrue and may continue to believe Adam said these things. sadchild —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadchild (talk • contribs) 17:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Critical Remarks

Quotation: "Some nations got luckier than others. E.g. English-speaking commentators have no problems pronouncing american, spanish, french, and swiss names."

My comments"

Wow! You want to argue about spellings and pronunciations, and then, it if just plain grossly ignorant to write "american, spanish, french, and swiss names" instead of "American, Spanish, French, and Swiss names". I am not a Christian, but even Jesus Christ supposedly said words to the effect of, "Why tell your brother that he has a beam in his eye, when you have a mote in yours? First, remove the mote from your own eye, so that you may see more clearly to remove the beam from your brother's eye." For you who don't know, the word "mote" is an old one meaning something like a telephone pole! So, remove the telephone pole from your own eye, before you try removing anything from someone else's eye." Note that when I said that Jesus Christ said this, I carefully said. "words to the effect of", because there are somewhat different English translations, and Jesus would have been speaking Aramaic, anyway. Note that Aramaic is capitalized. 72.146.50.11 19:26, 28 June 2007 (UTC) DAW

Also, note that there is no such language as "Swiss". 99% of the people in Switzerland speak either German, French, or Italian. Of course, even the same word (in writing), would be pronounced differently in the different parts of the country. Roger Federer's nationality actually brought this into the subject. Roger actually has a Swiss mother and a South African father, and so, he not only speaks his mother's native tongue fluently, but also English, because his father comes from the part of South Africa where they speak English, rather than Afrikaans, which is mostly like Dutch or Flemish. 72.146.50.11 19:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC) DAW

[edit] Tour Championship/Tier 1 Singles Titles

I've deleted the separate headinga for Tour Championship and Tier 1 singles titles, looking at other female players' Wiki entries these are not listed individually from their other singles titles. IMO, only Grand Slams have the prestige to be listed separately.

[edit] Weight

Is the weight right? It is way off in comparison to the WTA profile. http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/2/players/playerprofiles/PlayerBio.asp?PlayerID=310137

She obviously weighs much more than 130.

Now, several months later, she is down to 125. Just wasting away. You gotta love Wikipedia! Accuracy? We don't need no stinkin' accuracy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.123.116.253 (talk) 02:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure she weighs 125 lb/57 kg? That is very little if she is 6'2"/188 cm, that is BMI=16,1. She looks like having some muscles, not that thin. We could at least write 130 lb/59 kg since that is what googling gives and the link above also. --195.198.194.45 22:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed it to 130. This isn't a final solution, since I agree that she's almost certainly heavier than that, but 130 is better than 125 since it's what the official sources (WTA and her homepage) say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrVibrating (talk • contribs) 03:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Quotes section

The quote "She is ugly. Like a witch on the court." attributed to Roger Federer is clearly someone's malicious attempt to post negative and biased comments against Maria Sharapova and would also be defamatory to Federer. In fact, there has been a history of quotes inserted by various abusers of Wikipedia which are falsely attributed either to Sharapova or to other players.

The quotes "Will you marry me, Roger?" - Andy Roddick and "I love you Maria!" - Anonymous also appear rather childish and trivial.

To this end, the Quotes section was simply deleted as it lends itself to far too much abuse.

[edit] Deletion of Roddick Quote in Quotes section

The quote ("It was great going out with her. I had to keep blinking as I couldn't believe I was actually going out with Maria Sharapova."- Andy Roddick ) was deleted as both Maria and Andy have repeatedly denied any rumours of a relationship. If Roddick did say this, then a proper citation is needed, and also the proper context of how and why it was said needs to be shown (eg whether it was said on a proper date, or if he said it when they were out with a group of friends or at one of these events where they were together). Otherwise, to those not as discerning, this would simply fuel unsubstantiated rumours which Maria herself has denied.

[edit] Use of Indian Wells 2005 Photo in photos section

The photo of Maria at Indian Wells 2005 seems not only outdated but rather biased against her. The 2005 tournament was the one where she lost 6-0, 6-0 against Lindsay Davenport. However, she won the tournament in 2006. If there is to be a photographic representation of Maria from this or any tournament, why purposely pick the one (out of so many photographs available) which clearly shows her in the most unfavourable light? A photo from 2006 Indian Wells would be far more relevant and appropriate and should be substituted in place of the 2005 one, or at least a neutral photograph of another tournament - 23 June 2006.

I don't think this is really a problem. The point of the photo is to show Sharapova playing tennis. That would be like saying we can't show her in the Australian Open 2007, because she was mutilated in the final by Serena Williams. So? She made the final, didn't she?

Shannonbonannon 19:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect

There should be a redirect from 'Maria Sjarapova' as that's the way her name is spelled in lots of countries.

[edit] Professional Model

There seems to be a lot of silly talk about whether Wiki can call Maria a professional model. Maria herself calls herself a professional model. As she won Wimbledon at the age of 17, it seems obvious she's allowed to call herself anything she wants. And Wiki should follow respectfully after. So Wiki contributors can recover from their current PR crisis.

If anyone needed info on the youngest winners bits. Here's for singles:

1. Lottie Dod      1887 @ 15 years 9 months
2. Martina Hingis  1997 @ 16 years 9 months
3. Maria Sharapova 2004 @ 17 years 2 months

Here's for all championships:

1. Martina Hingis  1996 @ 15 years 9 months (282 days)
2. Charlotte Dod   1887 @ 15 years 9 months (285 days)

And finally, Sharapova's stats here: http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/bios/profile/ws/wtas961.html

Kokiri 21:24, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC) P.S. I Is it true that only yesterday we had an article on her?

Question: Here's snippets from the first two paragraphs...

Maria Sharapova (Russian: Мария Шарапова, Maríya Sharápova), born April 19, 1987...
At a tournament in Moscow in 1992, Sharapova was spotted by Martina Navratilova, who urged her parents to get her serious coaching in the United States. The following year, she emigrated to the U.S. at the age of eight to play tennis at the Nick Bollettieri Tennis Academy.

In 1992, she was 4-5; in the following year, she would have been 5-6. She couldn't be 8 until 1995. So which is right - Was the tournament in 1994, was it three years later that she moved to Florida, or was she age six? If she emigrated one year after the 1992 tournament, she could only be six years old at the oldest. --Golbez 15:50, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of 203.121.198.71's contribution ("too much detail")

I disagree with Cantus' deletion of 203.121.198.71's contribution. I thought that new info was interesting. I looked, but couldn't find any policy that said depth of article needs to be proportional to how famous the subject is. —Fleminra 07:43, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)

All right, I'll merge it. sigh. I still think it provides no real insight. --Cantus 08:40, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
Cool, thanks.. yes it was not well integrated before. —Fleminra 16:28, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Maria's height

the official height the WTA tour has her at:

http://www.sonyericssonwtatour.com/2/players/playerprofiles/playerbio.asp?PlayerID=310137

CBS & USA TV commentators speculating on her height are not official.

It's 6'2" now (August 2005): [1]

Edit, the link appears to have moved, I'll attempt to find another copy. She did herself state that she is 6'2" now.
Here we are: [2]

According to the most recent info on CBS, during this last US Open, her height is 6 feet even. Her weight--130 lbs.

I don't know which CBS broadcast you saw, but the one I saw said she was 6 foot 3 inches... --Flute138 03:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Several weeks ago, I heard a report (on TV, so I can't cite it) that she's just had a growth spurt, and has gained at least two inches in the last year. This is probably the source of the confusion on the matter. Would be nice to find a reliable, citable source for her current height/weight. -- Xtifr 12:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

it was mentioned a dozen times during the US Open finals, that Maria is now 6'3". I have made the edit twice, but it is constantly reverted. Can someone else confirm this?

i reverted height according to the latest data [3]. weight was blank, so i added 130 back, however, even i am not buying this, esp @ her height...The undertow 09:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I think its time for some final clarification regarding height-- the source listed by undertow that I placed into the article states that she is 6 ft 3...now, several IP addresses, and recently a newly joined wikipedian are arguing that she is 6 ft 2 in, based on sources such as the WTA tour website, which is severely outdated. Any of you guys have suggestions on how to handle this situation? I propose a vote, though it seems somewhat silly to vote whether someone is 6 foot 2 in or 6 foot 3 in. --Flute138 03:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Why not just omit the meaningless data about her height and weight? Tennis expert 05:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm surprised a tennis expert would say that. Height is an important factor in tennis. Taller players have an advantage based on net position. Do you think we should delete height data in general - as in for all athletes and anyone in general? It's like omitting age. There is a definitive answer here, but it appears that only Maria knows for sure. The undertow 08:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Folks, this becomes ridiculous. I agree that Maria is probably 6 ft 3" tall these days (see for instance discussion in the blog here [4]) but the large majority of websites give her 6 ft 2" following the "official" numbers given in the WTA tour site. It might be outdated but this is where people will most likely get the info. I propose to leave the height at 6 ft 2" pending changes on the WTA site. Otherwise Flute138 will end up spending lots of time and energy reverting edits by others (it seems that you are already doing this several times a week, aren't you?). If you are worried about accuracy, just add a date next to the height: 6 ft 2" (as of August 2005) for instance. I don't want to think about another edit war next year if she gains say half an inch! ArthurWeasley 06:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm fine with leaving it at 6 ft. 2 in, as long as there is some sort of annotation stating that the height is correct as of a certain date. As you alluded to ArthurWeasley, it's getting a bit repetitive consistently reverting, which is why I think it's important that a height be "agreed" upon. Remember, Wikipedia is a source that is commonly cited--just pop a search for Maria + Height, and you'll find several answer sites that simply quote this article. I'm just worried about wrong information being spread around. --Flute138 20:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I just want to avoid having a pointless edit war raging on Sharapova's page over an inch difference in height. I bet most of the users who are reverting the height to 6 ft 2" (or even 6 ft) do not consult the Talk page, so even if you and me and others agreed that she is taller, it won't stop the others to think otherwise until the official WTA page got updated. Better go with the flow and leave the height at 6 ft 2", citing WTA and annotate that it was as of August 2005 (info won't be wrong that way). ArthurWeasley 21:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no confirmation of Sharapova's 6'3" height and as you see next to Hantuchova she does not look it. I will keep it a 6'2" until her official wta page is changed. Just because John McEnroe says she's 6'3" does not make it true. The yalso mentioned she was 6'2" the tournament before that. The anouncers are always calling Roddick 6'3" and some websites have him at 6'3" also that blog still has Maria at 6'2" therefor she is probably 6'2" and if she is not, she is still listed as so. You can put something like "official listing:6'2"" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tough Critic (talk • contribs) .

[edit] US Open 2005

Someone recently added a section in the article titled US Open 2005. I commented it out (but it's still inside the article, just not visible) because it's not NPOV and I thought that it would be better to rewrite it as part of a general section on Sharapova's 2005 performance. Noelle De Guzman 09:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC) There is no confirmation of Sharapova's 6'3" height and as you see next to Hantuchova she does not look it. I will keep it a 6'2" until her official wta page is changed. Just because John McEnroe says she's 6'3" does not make it true. The yalso mentioned she was 6'2" the tournament before that. The anouncers are always calling Roddick 6'3" and some websites have him at 6'3" also that blog still has Maria at 6'2" therefor she is probably 6'2" and if she is not, she is still listed as so. You can put something like "official listing:6'2""

[edit] Citizenship

She came here at age 6, I did not know she didn't become a citizen yet.

Here? Where's here? Should we rename Earth the United States of Earth? (Sasquatchuk 02:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC))

"Here" most certainly means the United States by default. Sorry Sasquatch..

[edit] Photos

Should we have three pictures of Maria in this article? I should think that two would be enough. Not to mention, the third picture is under a new category named "Photos" which seems out of place considering it only has one photo in it, and this isn't a fan web site, it is a Wikipedia article. --Scotsworth 23:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Also a Photos section will encourage more pics to be placed on the page, and that isn't the purpose of the article. I'll remove the section and the pic from the main article. --Noelle De Guzman (talk) 06:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Sporting events and players should be illustrated graphically as it and they are experienced visually. I'll be restructuring the page to re-insert the removed picture and add on the side and not in a separate section. See also the International Space Station that has 25 images in my count or these other ones: Moon, Lance Armstrong, George W. Bush. --User:Akademan (talk) 1p.m., April 2nd 2006 (PDT)

I put in a photo from the 2006 Acura Classic. None of the other photographers got this shot since they were all on the wrong side. I was the only one to get her lifting up the trophy. ;) March 28, 2007

We can all pretty much agree that Maria is quite an attractive woman. And yes, I know that this is not a fansite by any means, but there most likely many people that hear of Maria and that she is attractive, and come to wiki to check it out... shouldn't we have a better photo of her for the main picture of the article? I think she deserves it. Oughgh 22:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There is now a huge picture of Maria Sharapova which which is rather disorienting. Seems to be overcompensating a bit.

[edit] US Open 2005 section, not NPOV

I initially commented out this section because it doesn't seem to be written in a NPOV style, and it's a match report. When I commented this out, I suggested the information in it be included as part of a description of Sharapova's 2005 results. However, someone removed the <!-- -->, making the section visible in the main article. I removed the section and put it here on the Talk page so other editors can discuss how to include it in the article.

Sharapova was defeated in the semi-finals of the US Open by Kim Clijsters after a nerve-wrecking encounter that ended 2-6 in first set, followed up by 7-6 in the second (ending in a tie-break) to finally lose with 3-6 in the third. Sharapova's defeat was much due to her inconsistent serves that led to a total of seven double faults during the encounter. Nevertheless, after falling behind 0-40 in the 12th game of the second set, the Russian started uncorking winners and managed to bring the game to deuce where after she fought off two more match points to force a tiebreak. Unfortunately, she didn't have the physical endurance left to pull-off a winning game on the last set and inevitably lost the match to Clijsters for the fourth time in a row.

Please place your comments and suggestions about this section here. --Noelle De Guzman (talk) 10:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sence?

How many times can you type 'sence'?

And 'noncense'? That's just noncense!

Probably a dyslexic vandal. Or just a normal plain stupid one. Plebmonk 00:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Plebmonk, a point was being made on the accuracy of a claim, apparently all u can add is just a quip and a rude remark on someone's spelling, you would'nt do it in their face so think twice (and possibly refrain) before you type an insult, at someone who is actually doing something useful, only because you feel protected by the lack of a real and immediate confrontation. Stemel 22:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Scheiss! I agree with the fellow who corrected the spelling of 'sence' and 'noncense'. Such misspellings of common words are pretty stupid, ad deserve to be pointed out as such. This is an English-language Wikipedia, and the rules of English spelling, punctuation, and capitalization must be followed. I recently saw in the article about another player who was born there, "russian". Just because such adjectives are not capitalized in German, and in certain other languages, does not mean that it is right in English. (which I have seen spelled "english" so many times that it makes me want to puke.)

In German, ALL nouns are capitalized, and none of the adjectives are. There are a few pronouns that are always capitalized, such as Sie (you), Ihr, and Ihnen. English has proper nouns like Europe and proper adjectives like European. If you don't know this, please go back to school and learn English, especially people whose native tongue is not English. I am also very tired of seeing English written with Polish or Russian (etc.) grammar. If you are going to write English, you must used English grammar.

When I write German, I write it using the German capitalization & grammar rules!

"Wie geht es Ihnen?" 72.146.50.11 17:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC) DAW

[edit] Model?

I'm not a Maria-fan but I wouldn't call her a model, in my opinion she doesn't do enough modeling to be called a model. Does she call herself a model (if so it would make sence to call her a model, if not it doesn't make any sence)? In my point of view I think the "Modeling" section should be transfered to "Trivia". Very good written article otherwise. Great job Sharapova-people! Mariah-Yulia 00:25, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

She does have a modeling contract with IMG, her management company. Still, that reference to "model" in the article's opening paragraph wasn't there until someone added it recently. --Noelle De Guzman (talk) 00:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank's for the info (and changing the article). I don't like it when they call her "a model who does find the time to play tennis" (as quoted from Belgium TV). And I think Wikipedia shouldn't encourage such noncense. Mariah-Yulia 02:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Golly, there is No Such Thing as "Belgium TV". It would be "Belgian TV" in English. If you watch Belgian TV, you native tongue is probably not English. They also must have more than one TV network in Belgium, because about half of that country speaks Flemish (very close to Dutch), and about half speak French. There is also a small minority of German speakers, and maybe some other language. Belgium has different linguistic zones, but the capital of Brussels (the way we spell it in English) is officially multi-lingual.
Sharapova herself has said that tennis is her priority, and she hasn't appeared as a model except for her spokesperson duties (and the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue). The person who most closely matches "a model who finds time to play tennis" is Anna Kournikova. ;) Thanks. --Noelle De Guzman (talk) 01:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Golly, have you ever been living under a rock. On the Internet, I have seen LOTs of other modeling photos of Maria, many of which done by distinguished photographers who take their trade very seriously. All I can say is to go search for them, if you even know how to use a search engine.
I also see that foolish "word" "noncense" again. Please learn to spell simple word before you attempt writing in public again. You are liable to embarass yourself.

72.146.50.11 17:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC) DAW

Will it be better if the "Career" section be further subdivided to the tennis part and the modeling part? Because currently, that flow of that section jumps from her model looks to her tennis to her model looks again. Under the latter division, we can include her participation in magazine covers, publicities and endorsements.Joey80 08:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, it's not an easy read now. Mariah-Yulia 21:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quotes

Seriously, some of those need checking - most specifically the ""I love cock" quote. If she had actually said that, I'm sure there would be no shortage of sites to source that from... Looks like vandalism to me. -- Greaser 21:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

It's true though, I'm not so sure about the "i take it up the batty hole" quote, if its gonna be included it needs some reliable sources. Plebmonk 00:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I translated and added the first three. The others were added by unknown user. --Brand спойт 15:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I put in, as a quote: "Ahhhh!!!" - at 101+ Decibels.

She really does grunt at 101+ decibels. Let's put that quote back in, it's something she is well known for, and wasn't meant as a form of vandalism. A source can be found here: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05174/526968.stm 70.64.7.224 21:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It's been vandalised again! Plain & simple word substitution in the last version. Sciamachy 11:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

Can someone check if 66.215.244.244's edit a few minutes ago was valid? I know nothing about pronounciation guides, but the edit doesnt seem right. My apoligies if I am just wasting everybody's time. Galaxydog2000 07:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation guides not based on IPA are misleading and thus deprecated; so I've removed it per WP:MOSIPA. Ambarish 03:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ambarish: > Pronunciation guides not based on IPA are misleading and thus deprecated This statement is incorrect. IPA is a standard (evolving standard, I must say), that doesn't mean that something not conforming it is misleading (and being misleading doesn;t mean being deprecated btw). There is not enough IPA guides for creating pronunciation of complex foreign names like Russian ones. At the same time not everyone understands what IPA notation means. Thus, I find resorting to a "classic" pronunciation guides quite reasonable.

> so I've removed it per WP:MOSIPA. Instead of doing that, Ambarish, you should have created a correct IPA pronunciation. You see - now there is no correct "international" pronunciation for Sharapova's name - the audio clip is made in Russian and by a Russian, and cannot be used directly by an English speaker.

[edit] Pronunciation revisited

I propose that Sharapova be pronounced shar-ra-po-va, without relative stress on ANY of the syllables. That would end all of those arguments. Anyway, the word is always pronounced in English as if it were spelled "Sharrapova", because the "r" is pronounced twice, which is not unusual at all in English words.

Also, it is a long-known fact about English that over time, all words tend to have the stress moved to the first syllable. Like it or lump it! Words that are adopted from other languages tend to have the primary stress moved to the first syllable, even if it was somewhere else in the native tongue, and unstressed words acquire a stress on the first syllable.

Therfore, the word "Sharapova" should eventually come to be pronounced as SHAR-ra-PO-va in English.

At least, Maria has a name that is not difficult to transliterate into the English alphabet. This is unlike the great Russian mathematician whose name is variously written as Chebyshev, Tchebysheff, and several other ways. One key issue is that some of the spellings came into English via French, and some others came by way of German. Also confusing, there are two great Russian mathematicians, father and son, who are both generally called "A. A. Markov", which means Andrei Andreiovich Markov, and where Andreiovich for a middle name always means "son of Andrei". So, the grandfather was also Andrei Markov, but I have looked up the facts, and his middle name was NOT Andreiovich, so his own father's name was not Andrei!

What is Maria's middle name? In the Russian system, and I presume also in Byelerussian, for example, if a woman's father's name is "Ivan", then her middle name automatically becomes "Ivanova".

"Ivanova" would be a proper middle name in Bulgarian, but in Russian, Ukrainian and Byelerussian a proper middle name is "Ivanovna". Netrat_msk (talk) 00:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

So, for example, I have a Russian friend whose name is "Natalia Ivanova something" (She has been married a couple of times times.) Now, Natasha is a dimunitive of Natalia, but even though she is a grown woman with a grown son, everyone calls her "Natasha".

When she came to America to live, her first husband's name was Boris. LOL, everyone got a big laugh, because here came "Boris & Natasha". As it turnes out, they had never heard of The Rocky and Bullwinkle Show! A couple of years later, poor Boris was killed in a traffic accident near Washington, DC, leaving Natasha a sad widow with two young sons to raise alone for years, until she remarried.

I think that I am the only American who ever called her older son, "Alexi Borissovich!"

72.146.34.147 16:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC) DAW

This went too far and should stop once and forever ;) Answering the calls for "reliable sources" for correct (Russian) pronunciation, here is the main Russian site of Maria Sharapova: http://www.sharapova.ru/ It is in Russian, but we need exactly this. Observe a speaker icon below the words www.sharapova.ru in the top left corner of the page? Click it and you will hear how Maria says in Russian: "Welcome to sharapova.ru". Recognize the word "Sharapova" and note where the stress is. Close the discussion. Amend the main page with the correct pronunciation. Thank you. Dmitry (a native Russian speaker)

Correct me if I'm wrong please but I think we have agreed that you're right some time ago. It was decided to keep sound file in the article with Russian way of pronouncing it for reference. Am I missing something? Papushin 16:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I didn't get to the point where you agreed, it's hard to through the tons of discussion material :) Now I see. I believe the correct pronunciation (not just sound file) should be added, like it is in case of other tennis players. IPA pronunciation notation is far from a common knowledge yet, so I would prefer to have "normal" pronunciation (like the one on the WTA website, but correct :) - and of course I would like to see IPA pronunciation as well - let's ask advanced linguists among us to prepare this. Dmitry

The announcers consistently stress the third syllable, sha-ra-PO-va. Is that really right? I'd have guessed sha-RA-po-va. I know they consistently mispronounce Jelena Jankovic's first name (should be stressed on the first syllable, YELL-eh-na, not ye-LEH-na the way they say it). --Trovatore 00:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The Sharapova's don't seem to correct anyone, so I would assume the announcers have it right. --Chr.K. 02:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Right way is sha-RA-pova. Check out this ogg file. Papushin 02:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how you pronounce it its still the same —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.27.35.38 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The same as what? I didn't ask whether it mattered, just how it's correctly pronounced. I'm inclined to believe Papushin (though it seems he forgot to include the link to the ogg file). --Trovatore 21:22, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
My mistake -- he put it on the article page rather than the talk page, which makes sense. For convenience I've copied it here: listen (help·info) --Trovatore 21:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't have a cite for this, but I saw a TV interview where Maria was asked about the pronunication, and she said something like "In Russia it is Shuh-RAH-puh-vuh, but in English Shah-ruh-POH-vuh is good..." 86.0.245.124 10:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

So we have a source that shows that the third syllable is stressed. The announcers and people in the media also stress the third syllable. On the other hand, we have a recording of some Russian guy (who is it? what's the source?) pronouncing it with the stress on the second syllable. This audio file only demostrates how it might be pronounced with the strees on the second syllable, NOT that this pronunciation is correct OR that the other one is wrong. We need a better source than this. Ufwuct 02:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

is a citation really necessary for the pronunciation of her name? The undertow 08:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see my above post to see why I think the answer is yes. If no source can be found, then this assertion (of the "correct" pronunciation) should just be removed. Ufwuct 03:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Hm -- I tend to agree that it's probably not WP's place to say that the horrendous "shahrahPOva" pronunciation is "wrong". Even though, let's be clear, it is.
Again, who says?
How would you feel about something like "pronounced shah-RAH-poh-vah in Russian; often rendered shah-rah-POH-vah by

English-language media"? It's simply descriptive; doesn't claim anything is "wrong", and it's informative. It's not the kind of thing for which it's easy to find a citation, and I think a citation on a pronunciation is a little silly-looking. --Trovatore 07:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

If we can't find a citation of any kind (I think a source showing that another person with the last name of Sharapova pronounces it with emphasis on the 2nd syllable would work, or a source of Maria complaining about how Americans pronounce it would work, ... etc.), then I would think that no assertion is better than an unsourced assertion. If no citation can be provided for the emphasis-on-2nd-syllable version, I would be prefer deleting both pronunciations. That way, Russians and Russian speakers will pronounce it their way and American, British, ... non-Russian speakers will pronounce it the other way (though I suspect that both groups will continue to pronounce it however the ____ they please (regardless of whether a source is found)), and the text of the article, which, to read requires no out-loud pronunciation, will otherwise completely unaffected. Ufwuct 15:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

after re-reading comments, i think that removing the entire pronunciation is viable. since the only 'correct' way to pronounce the name is how maria pronounces the name, i say delete it, until we can get an audio of her saying it. (i have no idea why she would say her own last name, but hey, it's possible)The undertow 03:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

No one who speaks English will ever argue how to pronounce a name like Jefferson. Same with RUSSIAN name Sharapova - Maria was born in Russia, her parents are Russian, she has a Russian surname and any of 150 million Russians will tell you that there is only one way of pronouncing it: Sha-RA-pova. Regardless of what any announcers or TV reporters or anyone else may say. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.92.103.148 (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC).
I think that logic is flawed. the only right way is determined by the 'owner' of the name. the name 'Stein' is one example.The undertow 02:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
It is hard to explain such a simple thing. Maria is Russian, was born in Russia and there is only ONE way of saying her name in Russian - Sha-RA-pova. That's what she's been (and still is) called in Russia. That's what her parents and grandparents were called. When she moved to the US, Americans started MIS-pronouncing her name but that doesn't change her name and the only correct way of saying it. She may move to Japan and the Japananese may have yet another way of saying her name. But just because someone may start saying Jef-FER-son doesn't make it correct pronounciation. Maria accepts the way English-speaking people MIS-pronounce her surname but that doesn't mean that that pronounciation is correct. Maria is NOT the "owner" of that name. That's a common Russian name - there's even a famous book annd movie character Vladimir Sharapov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Meeting_Place_Cannot_Be_Changed) known to every single person in the Soviet Union. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.126.209.1 (talk) 12:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
i don't think the jefferson analogy sits well. while its trivial, i would not want anyone asserting that i was pronouncing my first, much less last name incorrectly. i am glad it was removed, and i really think that since the article is about maria, the reference of pronunciation would only be valid if it is how she pronounces her name. if i had my own article and my first name being Gerry - I would want the soundbite to say it as 'Jerry' and not 'Gary' regardless of how 300 million americans pronounce it. anyway, just my explanation for my position. if maria would just stop by, say her name and how tall she is, well...that may help :) The undertow 02:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if 150 million Russians would agree. We don't have a reliable source to support that claim (the pronunciation or the claim that all Russians would pronounce it that way). It doesn't matter how she pronounces it. We don't have a reliable source stating how she pronounces it (or an audio file of Maria's pronunciation). Until we have a reliable source of either kind, we are in no position to make this assertion in the article. I agree with [The undertow's position: we should just delete the pronunciation information. If anyone finds a reliable source, then readd the information, with the source. Ufwuct 15:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I think the sources thing is a little bit overdone sometimes. A source on a pronunciation looks kind of silly. This is a "common knowledge" kind of thing; anyone who knows Russian knows how to pronounce "Sharapova", in general. Common knowledge should not usually be sourced.
It's true that migrants sometimes adapt the pronunciation of their names to local tastes (Fujimori was fu-hee-mori in Peru; don't know if he still is now that he's a fugitive from justice in Japan), but I think that would be the thing that would need to be proved.
On a side note, can anyone explain to me just why this mispronunciation was ever adopted in English-speaking countries? It's not as though sha-RA-po-va is hard for an Anglophone to say. We have lots of words stressed on the antepenultimate syllable. It's a little bizarre. --Trovatore 17:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Pronunciation information is unnecessary because this is a written word encyclopedia, and not a linguistics article at that. Normally, pronunciations would not need a source if they are common knowledge. However, we have a veriable source (actually probably many sources) that show another pronunciation, but none for the supposedly correct one. Therefore, no assertion is the best course here. I have therefore removed the pronunciation. Ufwuct 18:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
You guys are discussing the funniest thing in the world from Russian speaker perspective (not only native). The name in Russian in the article is written with accents which designate the correct prononciation. So you have the source in the article itself! You just refuse to put it in the form English speaker would understand. Russian names are consistently mispronounced by English speakers (I'm tired of correcting people myself) so it's not surprise that Maria is not correcting it either. Majority of articles about Russian celebrities have proper Russian prononciation with some explanations in case alternatives are incorrectly used by foreign speakers (Khrushev is one good example). There are many foreign names consistently mispronounced in Russian as well (Demi Moore is one good example) but it doesn't make Russian way correct (although Demi Moore never corrected anyone...). Even English names are often mispronounced by English speakers without being corrected by anyone (Bears kicker Robbie Gould had his name mispronounced by announcers until last year when he became famous enough to correct someone). I have a few more examples of wikipedia articles for consitently misprounced names if anyone is interested. This is an encyclopedia and for pure purpose of letting people know correct original prononciation of the name for referential purpose the article should have correct prononciation mentioned: in form of sound reference (ogg) and possibly other forms. Having said that I'm putting the ogg file back and I'm expecting anyone deleting it to produce correct Russian prononciation by native speaker if they feel the current one is incorrect. Papushin 04:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
'the funniest thing in the world?' i don't think a native speaker need challenge others and insist on going against the general consensus. i understand that russian may be your native language. english is mine. however, there is no agreeable pronunciation of tomato, apricot, Stein, route, advertisement or harassment. i think most will agree that the 'correct' pronunciation is irrelevant unless we hear the spoken word from Maria. to assert that you expect proof from anyone 'who deletes' it goes against the burden of proof. you have no citations and the fact that you speak russian has little bearing. The undertow 12:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
My friend, I understand your concern but let me assure you there is no any doubts about "correct" pronunciation of Maria's last name in Russian. Only one exists! The reason her name is pronounced differently by anouncers it's just difficulty they have pronouncing her name correcly. And in some other cases anouncers admit it. Also I'm not challenging her "American" name. People might choose to pronounce words the way they like it. As long it is commonly understood it's acceptable from my perspective. (I don't like nucealar though :)) The sole reason the ogg is there is to give English speaker reference to original pronounciation. Again, almosty all foreign (Russian, Polish, French, etc.) celebrities (including some tennis players) have ogg files for this purpose. If you noticed I put ogg after Russian spelling of the name to emphasize it's Rusian way of pronouncing it (you don't challenge Russian spelling, do you? Or may be it should be changed as well to make it sound like American?) To counter your argument of "burden of proof" I want to re-emphasize that proof is already there! It's spelled in Russian this way. I believe the fact that I speak Russian is enough to qualify me to read it and record in audio file. If you doubt my ability to read Russian correctly, again let me reassure you I do it quite proficiently. I can find a few sources written in Russian to confirm my point with correct pronunciation but I doubt that you'll accept it as a source. Thank you. Papushin 16:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I think the Russian spelling should be easy to verify. All you would need is a link to a Russian online news article. This would prove that spelling. This task seems relatively easy, and I(we) would appreciate it if you could easily prove this point for us. I will not take this part out of the article now, because it seems like it will be easily verified.
However, the .ogg file makes a conclusion about pronunciation, but it does not count as a source. We DO have a source that asserts that the correct pronunciation is with the accent on the third syllable (Shar-a-PO-va), but no reliable source that asserts that the correct pronunciation is with the accent on the second syllable (Sha-RA-po-va). It requires the leap of a fluent Russian speaker to show the rest of us non-Russian speakers that this (Sha-RA-po-va) would be the correct pronunciation. Ordinarily, this would be completely acceptable (and this would be an easily settled matter), except for the lack of a solid source for "Sha-RA-po-va" AND the prescence of a reliable source that asserts "Shar-a-PO-va".
Let's say I have a Slavic last name and I'm, let's say, third generation American, and therefore have no background in any Slavic languages. I've been pronouncing my last name a certain way my whole life, and pronouncing it the same way that my father does and even grandfather does. Maybe my last name is "actually" "correctly" spelled (or accented) in a different way, which would lead to a very different pronunciation than I am used to (or maybe it's even pronounced differently without any sort of spelling modification). If I had an article written about me on Wikipedia (which I know will not happen), it would be quite absurd for native speakers of this Slavic language to assert that my name is pronounced only one "correct" way when I, the subject of the article, and the only one whose opinion matters as far is pronunciation is concerned, pronounces it a different way. This would seem to leave us with a dilemma. How do we know which pronunciation to show in this article?!?!?!? OH NO!!! But then, as I have said before, we don't have to make any assertion (as this is a written-word encyclopedia), so there is no dilemma. No assertion is better than a wrong assertion.
Because she is a public figure, I suspect this information (on how she pronounces her own name) will become available eventually, sooner rather than later, if it is not already readily available. We should either look for a source or wait until one becomes available. Until then, it is best to keep the unsourced sound file out of the article. Ufwuct 02:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I have never seen a sound file source. I'm putting it back. --Trovatore 09:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't follow your logic at all. Plus, just because other people don't source something on Wikipedia doesn't mean you or I shouldn't. I could find thousands of articles on wikipedia that are unsourced or have missing citations, but that doesn't make it right. You have also said that "this sourcing thing" can be "taken too far." Sources are required; it's very simple. It's the cornerstone of this encyclopedia. Though we have gone on a long time with this seemingly small thing, we appear to have finally found a source, thanks to Papushin's work. This is what we're supposed to do. The system works! At any rate, I will not challenge the .ogg file being readded. Ufwuct 18:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok, it was a pain in the butt to find an article with correct prononciation since it's a public knowledge as somebody noticed before but I found one where Russian edition BBC reporter complains about incorrect prononciation of Russian names specifically by tennis announcers. So he specifically mentions SharapOva as incorrect. Here is the link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/sport/newsid_4630000/4630333.stm BBC standards are quite high so I believe you will consider it a good source. Papushin 04:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
okay, ill bite. considering this is the english version of her bio, can you translate your citation? i mean that in good faith. The undertow 12:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Here goes the translation. All proper accents are mine, author didn't bother provide the right ones since he also considers it a public knowledge, he just accents incorrect ones:

Ladies quaterfinals are starting on Wimbledon. Until now even infamous London weather was good to players but some of them got serious problems.

It looks like they lost their real names.

Some nations got luckier than others. E.g. English-speaking commentators have no problems pronouncing american, spanish, french, and swiss names.

Wow! You want to argue about spellings and pronunciations, and then, it if just plain grossly ignorant to write "american, spanish, french, and swiss names" instead of "American, Spanish, French, and Swiss names". I am not a Christian, but even Jesus Christ supposedly said words to the effect of, "Why tell your brother that he has a beam in his eye, when you have a mote in yours? First, remove the mote from your own eye, so that you may see more clearly to remove the beam from your brother's eye." For you who don't know, the word "mote" is an old one meaning something like a telephone pole! So, remove the telephone pole from your own eye, before you try removing anything from someone else's eye."

Note that when I said that Jesus Christ said this, I carefully said. "words to the effect of", because there are somewhat different English translations, and Jesus would have been speaking Aramaic, anyway. Note that Aramaic is capitalized. 72.146.50.11 17:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC) DAW

Ferrero, Federer - elementary! Even French Grosjean sounds the way he supposed to.

With ladies not everything goes smooth. Clijsters - Ok, Mauresmo ... is sort of Ok. But then go Russians.

SharApova becomes SharapOva, KuznetsOva becomes KuznEtsova. Problems do not end there. MYskina becomes MyskIna, and even player with the simpliest Russian last name PetrOva becomes PEtrova.

Maybe it is just tennis? In the end of the day, there were no problems with Eltsyn. Solzhenitsyn also goes well. Putin - just ideal.

Take oligarkhs for instanse. Berezovsky - accent is in the right place, Gusinsky is also ok, Khodorkovsky - no complains. But in tennis KAfelnikov turns out to be KafElnikov.

Only Safin seems to be Ok, but until it gets to his first name... and now he becomes MArat. And now his sister somehow is SafIna.

It looks like tennis commentators think more about shots than accents (P: shot and accent are similar words in Russian). And it looks like there is no way out of it.

Even great Navratilova is still called NavratilOva by them.

We theorized a bit in the family on why this phenomenon with Russian names occurs (considering our name is also screwed up often, although it's easier to say it correct way in English). I have a theory that changing accents makes Russian names sound more exotic, more "Russian" for non-Russian ear and people involuntary do it first time. I observe the same thing with Indian names today. My hope is that with "internationalization" of modern economy English-speaking people (especially Americans) will be more sensitive to foreign names and more proficient in foreign languages in general and we'll have discussions like this less often. Papushin 16:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Have you seen that recent TV ad with a Pomeranian talking to SharapOva? So don't hold your breath. English-speaking people, Americans especially, are so sure that they do everything correctly and not only have right but must teach others what to do and how to do it, that no sensitivity and proficiency on their part in any matters foreign could be expected. (Of course, there are exceptions: I met the Brits and the Americans who can perfectly pronounce Dvořák, Milošević or Nabokov, and even some who speak Russian better than many Russians. But, as always, exceptions confirm the rule.) All the best, --Barbatus 03:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
This source that you have found seems to do the trick to prove the spelling. The source you found also implies that Sharapova's name is pronounced the way you have been saying it is. Therefore, I agree with the sound file being readded to the article, as it shows how a Russian would normally pronounce the name (in accordance with the BBC source you found). It also (though only indirectly) attacks/calls into question the source that asserted "Shar-a-PO-va". This is what I was looking for. A source to call into question the original source. However, I'm not sure I would readd the "Sha-RAH-po-va" part. First, it shouldn't be readded because IPA is highly preferred. Second, the sound file seems to do the trick. Also, I certainly wouldn't readd the part that says "Incorrect: Shar-a-PO-va"; that seems unnecessary and silly.
Thank you for your dedication to finding a source. Sometimes, claims are exceedingly easy to verify. Other times, (and I know from experience), they are very difficult to verify even when you know the answer ahead of time. Either way, you have strengthened this article, even if it was for something minor. Thanks again. Ufwuct 18:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I applaud your Papushin effort in the translation. it was very refreshing. i disagree with the re-add, as this is the english version of her bio, and a russian source does little to enhance the article. sources, like grammar, should adhere to the language and its content. as much as i feel that your reference (which is much appreciated) is exclusionary to those of us that do not speak russian, i will trust the judgment of others on this site, and concede. thanks. The undertow 11:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Once upon a time, when Jay Leno was introducing his guest, Anna Kournikova (Анна Курникова), to the audience of The Tonight Show, he blithely and persistently insisted on mispronouncing her last name by stressing its penultimate syllable — even after she gently protested his clinging to the ignorant pattern so well established among lazy American sports announcers. She finally threw up her hands and resigned herself to what, years later, Maria Sharapova has probably decided is too much trouble to pose a polite protest or to provide a correction.

A massively popular pattern of mispronunciation among prominent voices does not, however, render such insensitivity right.

If some popular group had instigated the widespread pronunciation of "Kennedy" as if it were spelled "K'neddy," such widespread mispronunciation would not permit us to claim at Wikipedia that that was an acceptable pronunciation. I would not think it wise, in fact, to cite such a pronunciation for a Kennedy's Wikipedia entry, except perhaps to note parenthetically the prevalence of that (still unacceptable) mispronunciation.

Such, I think is the case with Sharapova here. We ought not implicitly endorse any such mispronunciation here. Our Russian friends here have already correctly expressed the sound of her name as she and her family have been saying it for as long as they've been in this land. It is no more tricky for the western tongue to place the slight stress on the second instead of the third of its syllables. There are a few sounds in Russian that English speakers find difficult to imitate, but Sharapova contains none of them.

The only time a Wikipedia entry should draw the unorthodox pronunciation of a common name to the attention of all its readers is when the object of the article is a person or a family that uses that unorthodox pronunciation preferentially itself. Two examples that come to mind are the first names of Ralph Fiennes and Demi Moore. Most Americans mispronounce them both, but such popular ignorance is no excuse for perpetuation by those who so generously enhance Wikipedia, please.

       Wortschätzer (talk) 06:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

Someone put in Trivia section that she grunts at 1021.2 decibels. I changed it to what I think he meant, 102.12 decibels. Correct me if I'm wrong. - Letsgomets1212 13:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sportsbook reports that "a London tabloid reported that her persistent shrieks topped out at 102 decibels". Given the indirect and unreliable source and the implausibility of the claim, I'm sure this was hyperbole. I certainly don't think it should be stated as "Sharapova's on-court grunts have been measured at 102.12 decibels." I doubt if any actual measurements were involved. -- Xtifr 00:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
p.s. fixed. -- Xtifr 00:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
The original mark was 101.2 decibels. I haven't touched the article, but I did update it to IMDb once upon a time (I saw it in a paper and IMDb had a lower figure). --Anshelm '77 19:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "1021.2 decibels"?

If anyone here's an audiologist | acoustician, would that be audible on how many continents? Would there be earthquakes?

Hopiakuta 01:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an audio-anything, but since the db scale is logarithmic, and since Krakatoa was estimated at 180db, I feel safe in saying that the answers to your questions are: "all" and "yes". In fact, even though space is mostly empty, I think there might still be a danger of marsquakes!  :) -- Xtifr 23:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this is right, but I think the figure was 10^((1021.2-102.12)/10) = 8.09095899 × 10^91 times too large. --StuartBrady (Talk) 21:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is she the "feel so pretty" nike woman?

Is she the "feel so pretty" nike woman?

Yes she is. That commerical is pretty annoying, its stuck in my head. Baseracer 16:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hopiakuta 01:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nike

I think that she is also sponsored by NIKE, but I didn't see it in the endorsements section. Am Wrong?

well, she was wearing the "shwoop" or whatever it's called very prominently (left shoulder) and no other logos while winning the WTA title yesterday. I don't know the facts but you gotta think she mande bank on that! Tzf 17:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

this trivia section in this article is way out of hand. please reduce the trivia entries. find other places in the article to put the info. Kingturtle 23:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Masha is not an "affectionate" name. It's a "short" name. You wouldn't say that William Clinton is "affectionately" called Bill, would you? PBH 01:24, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced criticism and rumours

I'm moving this here till someone can source it and word it in a more neutral manner.

Maria is rumoured to be dating tennis player Andy Roddick.
Sharapova is known out on tour as a brat and disliked by most players. Most Russian players, including Anastasia Myskina, do not care for Sharapova because of her father and because of her disloyalty to Russia. The only Russian player that has expressed positive comments about Sharapova is Maria Kirilenko.
She is also known to be arrogant during business deals. At the 2006 US Open Prince Party, Sharapova refused to attend her sponsor's event because she was not paid enough. However, that night, she signed a lifetime deal with Prince. Serpent-A 01:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
When you work out as much as she's obviously had to, to become one of the greatest tennis players worldwide, you get to be a little arrogant if you want. Opinion, though, does not wikipedia display. --Chr.K. 02:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Maria Sharapova defeated.."

Maria Sharapova defeated the number one player in the world, Amélie Mauresmo, 6-0, 4-6, 6-0. This is the first time that a female has lost 2 love games in US Open history. Next Sharapova will face Justin Henin-Hardenne for the 2006 US Open Championship.

I am a fan of Maria but I don't think this statement is right. Lindsay Davenport double-bagled a player in the earlier rounds. Could this statement be missing the words 'This is the first time that a female has lost 2 love games in the semi-finals of US Open history'?

EDIT: Changed it myself, after reading a source. [5]

[edit] Languages

Does Maria speak Russian? tdwuhs

She surely does. Papushin 01:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banana incident?

Why are there so many references to a banana in her post-US Open interview?

Because in her match again Tatiana Golovin of France and Justine Henin-Herdenne in the final, Maria's father and her hitting partner

motioned to her with a banana, and Maria then ate a banana. They also signaled to her using their fingers, and she would reply with the same hand gesture while drinking. It's controversial b/c some considered it coaching, which is not allowed.

[edit] Thanks for adding in the defeating the top 3 players at the same year

Thought it was something sort of important, wanted to add it in myself. Thanks anyway.

About Sharapova's photo, wouldn't a new photo, maybe the one taken during the US Open 2006 be better?

[edit] Moving to America

According to Maria's interview on Jay Leno a few days ago, she said herself that she moved to the US when she was 7... this page previously said 9. I have changed it to 7. If anyone sees reason to change it back, please do so citing your reason. I'm new to making changes, so I don't know if I should leave a footnote on the page stating why it was changed... if anyone with more experience would make the appropriate fixes, I would be grateful.

SlyMaelstrom 19:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:SndrAndrss

Could someone revert the last edit by User:SndrAndrss (which replaced a perfectly good creative commons licensed image with a fair-use image), please? I can't do this because of WP:3RR. --StuartBrady (Talk) 19:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Note" moved to "References"

There should be no need to have both a "Notes" section and a "References" section. Additionally, neither of the references in the original references section were serving a purpose. The first was a dead link and the second was a duplicate of Note 10 [6]. So I basically renamed the "Notes" section to "References" and eliminated what was previously the "References" section. --Ben Best 03:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

In the process, you forgot to adapt the links throughout the article. None of them works right now. This will need to be fixed.
And speaking of notes and references to external sources, I'd like to give a heads up concerning the "Notable matches" section: we cannot arbitrarily rank matches as notable. Any matches listed there that do not reference at least one external source that qualified it as "notable" (or otherwise worthy of special note, with whatever adjective), will be removed. And please, let's not confuse things: we all know that a high-profile player makes headlines, usually flattering ones, whenever they step into the court. What is required here is not a piece of news from hours after that match took place that happens to be praising Sharapova — by that standard, we'd list every single match she ever won, and maybe some that she lost too ;-) — we need something that says that that match stands out somehow from her other regular appearances, since what we are doing in this section is ranking a number of matches that are being qualified as "notable", worthy of special attention amidst all the matches played by Sharapova. I realize this is not really easy to come by, which normally goes to show that those lists are really original research and not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Similar lists for other high-profile players have been removed on these exact same grounds. Redux 18:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I have reinstated the "Notable Matches" section so that it includes only the matches that the Women's Tennis Association believes are sufficiently notable to be included in the WTA's "Career in Review" section of Sharapova's profile. I hope this satisfies your concerns. Tennis expert 19:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
As I noted on your talk page, unfortunately it doesn't. Because the WTA website is all-inclusive. It does not provide an arbitrary list, but rather it lists her performance in all tournaments in which she appeared in each season, either informing that she won or informing the stage in which she was eliminated. If we derive an arbitrary "shortlist" from that, it's still original research. Redux 12:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Please refer to the note I left on your talkpage. [7] Thanks. Tennis expert 17:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Should ITF Titles Be Counted In WTA Tour Titles?

I don't think they should be listed with the WTA titles, and instead should be a seperate listing.

[edit] Edits by The undertow and PRRfan

Here is my reasoning for reverting your edits: (1) The "has been ranked" language could be interpreted as "currently ranked." That is why it is better to state specifically that she is a "former World No. 1 ranked player." (2) Her being ranked number 1 does not necessarily mean that she was the "best" player at the time. (3) Rankings come out weekly. Thus, it is ambiguous to say that as of "January 2007" she is the second ranked player. (4) I have no idea what you mean, The undertow, by "already accepted terms." Please explain where this acceptance is documented. (4) "At seven" is ambiguous. It is preferable to specifically refer to her "age" at seven. (5) It is clearly better to say this, "Two years earlier, she defeated Serena Williams in the singles final at Wimbledon" than this, "Two years earlier, she beat Serena Williams to take the singles title at Wimbledon." The text already refers to her having won two Grand Slam titles. Therefore, it is redundant and unnecessary to say in the next sentence that she took the singles title. Tennis expert 23:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

your edits: found here, where you change 'beat' to 'defeated' and 'seven' to 'age of seven' are unnecessary. you simply reassigned your own vocabulary as there were no significant changes to the article. there was no ambiguity about her age.
i'm '31.' i'm sure most readers would not mistake that for my name. The undertow 23:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Analysis of her game and technique

Wiki articles on other tennis players include something about their style of play, strong and weak points, etc. The present wiki article on MS covers her stats, results, awards, modelling, endorsements, screaming, etc. but what about how she plays? Baseline power hitters like her are easy to criticize, but I believe that since she has been successful she deserves to have at least some respectful mention of the development of her game and her playing attributes that contribute to her success.

[edit] Height & Weight

Although her height is listed in the Info box, it is exceptional and I think some mention of it should be made in the body text. Something along the lines of At 188cm (6ft 2in) she is one of the tallest players in women's professional tennis, being only 1cm (½in) shorter than Lindsay Davenport. I'm not too fussed about the wording. I will go ahead and add it if no-one has a good reason not to. Secret Squïrrel 04:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Her height is not notable enough to be discussed in detail. There have been many female world-class tennis players whose height was in Sharapova's general range. Tennis expert 06:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Several webpages (for example, http://www.netglimse.com/celebs/pages/maria_sharapova/index.shtml ) state that her height is 1.83m or 1.84m instead of 1.88m. They all, however, claim that she is 59kg. Is it possible that this info is outdated? Q43 19:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Managed to find the info in her own webpage: http://www.mariasharapova.com/defaultflash.sps at Stats / Accomplishments. Q43 20:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course the 59 kg claim is outdated by many years. She would have to be a twig to be at that weight. That is when she was about 15 or 16 years old.

Sharapova's fans could put 95 lbs. on here, and the Wikipedia editors would gladly allow it. When something approximating the truth is posted (150 pounds is a minimum for a well-nourished, muscular 6'2" woman), it is taken down immediately. Apparently Sharapova, Serena, and others who lie wildly about their weight are given free rein to do so...like certain actresses who lie about their age, and are unchallenged by Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.59.206.220 (talk) 03:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible that a professional athelete has no knowledge of her own weight? Will somebody please find it out!!!!!!!!!!!

125lb is ridiculous. She has to be at least 160lb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.87.230.129 (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox data

Should the date next to Highest ranking be the first time a player achieved that ranking or the most recent? Most recent would normally be covered in the body text. Secret Squïrrel 04:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it is standard to show the first time that ranking was achieved. That's how it's done on the ATP and WTA websites.

Shannonbonannon 19:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delete nonnotable information about fan-written song concerning the legs of Sharapova

I was wondering why you would delete this information from triva and External link? What trivia section is all about? Exactly for 'nonnotable information'. Now, do you think that Maria's fan deserve or not to know about a song dedicated to her? The only word I can figure out for this deletion is prejudice. If you're concerned about the song's title you should pay attention to the lyrics till you realize the song emphasizes her grace and talent. The play around her legs just show how important is to use them during a tennis match - something she does really well - nothing else. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 200.157.224.30 (talk) 02:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Education

Does anybody know if Maria graduated high school? Last time I read that she attended an on-line high school, and that she was to graduate at age nineteen.

It was Keystone National High School. --Brand спойт 23:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Is she planning to be US citizen?

come on, it's too much obvious that she doesn't consider her self as a Russian. None of the times played to Russia in FED cup, also her style of playing and talking is too much American, but if it's on her mind, why she hasn't done it yet?

Maybe for the same reason that I have not -- I have lived in the US for 12 years, but I am still proud to be a British citizen, and I have no intention of becoming a US citizen (not that there is anything wrong with that). And please sign your posts by typing 4 tildes (~) at the end. --ukexpat 18:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too much irrelavant information for 2007

Maria's 2007 year has too much irrelavant information. We do not need to add information such as "Sharapova had also been questioned over her uncharactersitic shaky serves and double faults this season, but she showed no signs of that as well as she hit 9 aces in her second round match, including one that reached 113 mph (181.1 km/h). Later in the tournament, she hit one that reached 184 km/h. We dont need this kind of things. It would edit it, but i might mess up the whole article so please put less information

I agree, there are quite a few current events and speculative statements in there. Jmjanssen 05:05, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I made some edits, but I am not the proper person to totally rework the section as it really needs. Also added a current sport tag. Jmjanssen 23:23, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I just cleaned up the section a bit. In case anyone wants to re-add anything, here is what was there beforehand:


In 2007, Sharapova reached the final of the Watson Water Champions Challenge, an exhibition tournament and warm-up for the 2007 Australian Open, where she was defeated by Kim Clijsters 6-3, 7-6(8).

At the Australian Open, the top-seeded Sharapova defeated the 62nd-ranked Camille Pin in the first round 6-3, 4-6, 9-7 on her fourth match point. The match was played in air temperatures that exceeded 40 °C (104 °F) and on-court temperatures that exceeded 50 °C (122 °F). In the fourth round, Sharapova defeated compatriot Vera Zvonareva 7-5, 6-4. In the quarterfinals, Sharapova overcame the twelfth-seeded Anna Chakvetadze 7-6(5), 7-5. She then defeated fourth-seeded Clijsters 6-4, 6-2 in the semifinals to reach her first Australian Open final and gain the opportunity to win the only Grand Slam singles title that a Russian woman had not yet won. However, Serena Williams, ranked No. 81 in the world, overpowered Sharapova 6-1, 6-2.

Sharapova then achieved disappointing results at her next three tournaments, partly due to hamstring and shoulder injuries, which decimated the effectiveness of her serve. At the Tier I Toray Pan Pacific Open in Tokyo, Japan where she was a champion in 2005, she retired to Ana Ivanovic when leading 6-1 0-1 in the semifinals; at the Tier I Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells, California where she was the defending champion, she lost to Vera Zvonareva in the fourth round 4-6 7-5 6-1 (after leading 5-4 in the second set); and at the Tier I Sony Ericsson Open in Key Biscayne, Florida where she was a finalist the past two years, she was crushed by Serena Williams for the second successive time, with a lopsided scoreline of 6-1 6-1. However, she did beat a resurgent Venus Williams in the third round of Miami 2-6, 6-2, 7-5, a good result.

Sharapova would be forced to miss most the clay court season for the second consecutive year because of the aforementioned injuries. She made her clay season debut at the Istanbul Cup, where she lost to Frenchwoman Aravane Rezaï in the semifinals 6-2, 6-4, in preparation for the French Open. It was uncharacteristic of her to play a week before a Grand Slam.

Sharapova then reached semifinals of the French Open for the first time in her career. She defeated former top 10 player Patty Schnyder in a controversial fourth round match after being down two match points 3-6, 6-4, 9-7, then beat fellow Russian Anna Chakvetadze in the quarterfinals 6-3, 6-4. In her semifinal match she fell to up-and-comer Ana Ivanović 6-2, 6-1.

At the DFS Classic in Birmingham, United Kingdom, Sharapova lost in the final to second seeded Jelena Janković 4-6, 6-3, 7-5. Her record at the Tier III grass court event was extended to 23-3 in 5 tries. Sharapova played in the Wimbledon, falling victim to Venus Williams (a three-time champion at that time, and who would go on to win for a fourth time that year) in the fourth round 6-1, 6-3.

Sharapova was scheduled to play the Fed Cup for Russia in their semifinal tie against the USA during the weekend of July 14-15. However, she withdrew claiming that her shoulder injury that had been bothering her for most of the year was causing problems again.[1] Sharapova was not able to play in the final versus Italy, but was flew to Moscow to be a hitting partner for her teammates since she could not serve on her doctor's orders.

Sharapova then played her first summer hardcourt tournament, the Acura Classic in San Diego, California, where she was the defending champion. In the final, she faced #11 seed Patty Schnyder and ended up winning 6-2, 3-6, 6-0, claiming her first title of the year, 5th Tier I title, and the 16th singles title of her career. This was the first time she successfully defended at Tier I title. Sharapova had previously defended Tier III titles [Tokyo Japan Open in 2004 and Birmingham in 2005.

Her next tournament was the East West Bank Classic in Los Angeles, California. As the top seed, she moved into the semis after winning in straight sets 6-3 6-4 in 1 hour and 30 minutes against Russian rival and defending champion Elena Dementieva in the quartefinals. Sharapova currently leads the series 7-2. She lost to Dementieva in the semis last year. Sharapova was scheduled to face another Russian Nadia Petrova, but withdrew briefly before the match with a shin injury. She had already pulled out of the Rogers Cup. Sharapova clinched the US Open Series shortly before the US Open (tennis) in New York City began.

The US Open draw was released on August 22nd; with Sharapova seeded #2. She had a seemingly easy bottom half of the draw. She won her first two rounds against Roberta Vinci and Casey Dellacqua, dropping a total of only two games. Sharapova lost her third round match to 18-year-old Pole Agnieszka Radwańska in three sets 6-4, 1-6, 6-2. It was Sharapova's earliest exit at a Slam since she lost in the same round at the U.S. Open three years ago to Mary Pierce (also in three sets). Though her serve had looked back to normal during the US hardcourt season, the velocity on her serve diminished during the third set. When the September 10th rankings were released, Sharapova had dropped two spots to #4.

At the Kremlin Cup in Moscow, Sharapova crashed out to Victoria Azarenka of Belarus in the second round, 7-6(9), 6-2. Despite the tournament being held in her country of citizenship, Sharapova's lifetime record in Moscow is 2-2. Sharapova then withdrew from the Zürich Open in Zurich, Switzerland and the Generali Ladies Linz in Linz, Austria due to the continuing shoulder problems she has been suffering throughout the year. She was the defending champion at both events. Sharapova's ranking dipped to #6.

Resurgent top 10 player and former world #5 Daniela Hantuchová defied the odds and beat Patty Schnyder for the Linz title, thus knocking Sharapova off the eighth and final spot to qualify for the 2007 WTA Tour Championships. They were both exactly tied in points to qualify, but Hantuchova played over twice as many tournaments, thus giving her the edge. However, in a surprising turn of events, Venus Williams withdrew from the championships in Madrid due to medical problems. This meant that Sharapova was granted the vacant spot.

Maria Sharapova returned from a nearly three-week absence, including missing most of the indoor hardcourt season to beat Daniela Hantuchová 6-4, 7-5. It was the sixth-ranked Russian's first win since Aug. 31. She extended her head-to-head against Hantuchova to 6-1 (winning the last 6). Her second match saw her defeat World Number 2 Svetlana Kuznetsova 5-7, 6-2, 6-2 to advance to the semifinals. Sharapova now leads the series 4-3. In her third and final round robin match, Sharapova gained revenge against Ana Ivanović 6-1, 6-2 in just over an hour, thus evening the series to 2-2. Sharapova then defeated Anna Chakvetadze 6-2, 6-2 for a flawless 5-0 head-to-head lead to advance to the championship match. She then lost to top-ranked Henin 5-7 7-5 6-3 in a dramatic match that lasted 3 hours and 24 minutes.

Sharapova ended the year as number 5 on the official WTA tour rankings, her fourth year in a row with a top 5 finish.

I cleaned-up the section, only to have it reverted by the person primarily responsible for adding tabloid-style writing to this article. If you're interested in an encyclopedic version of 2007, see what I did and make your own decision. Tennis expert (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Romantically Linked"

Please stop restoring this paragraph to the article. It is in violation of Wikipedia policy on Biographies of Living Persons as it is both uncited and states itself that they are "unconfirmed". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a gossip column. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe it to be notable. There's credible evidence suggesting that something MAY have happened between Sharapova and all the people mentioned, therefore, I consider it a valid entry to state these rumoured relationships which all have evidence behind them (the evidence being articles, pictures, and other materials). My understanding of the general Wikipedia policy on this type of thing is that, if there is evidence strongly suggesting that a relationship has taken place, as long as it is stressed that the information is unconfirmed, it is generally acceptable. I was looking at Nicole Kidman's page just earlier, and that contained information of Kidman's rumoured relationships between her marriages to Tom Cruise and Keith Urban - none of have ever been confirmed, but they were nevertheless included, with a note stressing that they were unconfirmed. Therefore, I can't see why the same shouldn't happen here.
For now, I will not re-add the information to the page, but I am genuinely interested to here your further thoughts on this, Escape Orbit (and anyone else). Musiclover565 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
The information may be notable and may have been rumoured, and may even be fact, but unfortunately we can't tell, as we have no cites to establish anything. It's simply not enough for you to "believe" it to be notable, Wikipedia requires evidence that it is notable. If you note on the Nicole Kidman's page the information is cited. It also demonstrates how rumours about relationships can be both contentious and actionable. This is why Wikipedia policy is quite clear on this;
  • "Editors should avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to an encyclopedia article about the subject."
  • "Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced"
Unless you can provide good solid references for this information it should not be on the page. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Weight

There is simply NO WAY that an 1.88m woman as athletic and muscular as Sharapova could weigh anything even near 59kg! She would be 70kg absolute minimum. I don't mean to dispute the validity of the source but - it is just not possible! 58.178.8.108 (talk) 12:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it does seem unlikely she weighs so little. But until we have a source that says this we can't add it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

I added pronunciation. I hear Sharapova so often mispronounced as SharapOva, so I thought I need to make people aware - its' "SharApova". If you want rephrase it, it's OK with me.--Atitarev (talk) 05:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ridiculous extent of citations needed

The extent that people have been demanding citations recently has been ridiculous. For instance, in the 2008 section, the fact that she has been seeded lower than at any Grand Slam since 2004 has been marked as needing a citation. Why? It is a simple fact. In any case, what citation could possibly be found? Unless it is suggested we cite every single list of Grand Slam seedings since 2004? Citations are only really needed for more obscure facts or events, which aren't generally in the public domain; the quotations list and certain aspects of her personal life, for example. Events in the common knowledge (amongst the tennis analysts' community) do not need citations - unless every single result she's ever achieved should be cited? I also dispute the notice at the top of the article saying it is like a magazine article; how is it? I think it generally uses very unbiased, balanced tones. It is much more balanced than many other tennis articles, and in my opinion, by far one of the best organised of the tennis articles. Terms like "blasted through" instead of "defeated" for example does not make it unencyclopaedic; encyclopaedic does not necessarily mean it has to be a completely soulless article. More colourful language can be used to illustrate her play at a certain time. 172.143.183.232 (talk) 19:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong with your version of Sharapova's 2008 year?
Let's count your unsourced POV and commentary: (1) "swept through" to the quarterfinals "easily"; (2) "impressive" wins; (3) "stunned" world number one; (4) "resounding" 6-4 6-0 victory. Here is the complete text of your version: "Sharapova was the fifth seed at the Australian Open (her lowest seeding at a Grand Slam singles tournament since the 2004 U.S. Open) where she swept through to the quarterfinals easily, registering impressive wins over former world number one Lindsay Davenport (6-1 6-3) and 11th seed Elena Dementieva (6-2 6-0) en route. In the quarterfinals, she stunned world number one Justine Henin with a resounding 6-4 6-0 victory, ending Henin's 32-match winning streak, before defeating an injured Jelena Jankovic 6-3 6-1 to reach her second consecutive Australian Open final and fourth career Grand Slam final. She will play Ana Ivanovic for the title."
My version deletes the POV and commentary, deletes nonnotable information, preserves citations that previous editors had diligently added, reasonably requests a citation to support the "lowest seeding" assertion, and adds appropriate commas in match scores. No question that my version is more encyclopedic. Here it is: "Sharapova was the fifth seed at the Australian Open, which was her lowest seeding at a Grand Slam singles tournament since the 2004 U.S. Open.[citation needed] On the way to the quarterfinals, Sharapova defeated Lindsay Davenport in the second round[2] and Elena Dementieva in the fourth round. In the quarterfinals, Sharapova defeated World No. 1 Justine Henin 6-4, 6-0,[3] snapping Henin's 32-match winning streak. Sharapova then won her third consecutive Grand Slam semifinal and reached her second consecutive Australian Open final when she defeated an injured Jelena Jankovic 6-3, 6-1. She is scheduled to play Ana Ivanovic in the final." Tennis expert (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid that while your edits may have the best of intentions, they are consistently un-encyclopaedic. Wikipedia is not a place for opinions and your edits frequently use emotive and hyperbolic terms. It is not for you to say whether her victories were "impressive". Either quote the score and let the reader decide, or cite a good reference that says it. If she "stunned" her opponent then let us see a cited quote from her saying "I'm stunned". Otherwise it's either your opinion, or you are a mind-reader, or (more likely) you are inappropriately spicing up your copy with "tabloidese".
While it might be considered over-kill to cite every result, the manner of the win, analysis of the play and reporting of what the players' inner-most thoughts are most certainly do need to be cited. It's unfortunate that you feel this makes the article "soulless", but that's how encyclopaedias are. They are not biographies and they are not magazines.
You've submitted some good stuff here, so please don't stop. But you need to use the correct tone.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, thanks both of you for your comments.
My view, and I believe this is in line with Wikipedia's general policy on sportspeople's articles, is that some context should be provided; if a player is playing impressively (and it is near-indisputable that Sharapova is currently doing so; even the BBC, about as neutral a news organisation as you're ever going to get, appreciates this) then I believe that should be conveyed, just like if she is playing poorly, it should also be conveyed (as in the case of the US Open 2007). Many other tennis articles conduct this. Saying she got to the QF's easily is acceptable, because, by the scorelines, she clearly do it easily; this is not even personal judgement of her performance in each match, it is just simply the facts. Similarly, I believe the use of "stunned" is appropriate; Henin was expected to win, but Sharapova instead registered a comprehensive win. If you want, I could find a citation stating before the match that Henin was favourite?
Finally, thank you Escape Orbit for your compliment, but I stand by that generally, I've used an appropriate tone. 172.143.183.232 (talk) 22:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but nothing is "simply the facts" or "near-indisputable" unless you cite it. If the BBC appreciates that Sharapova is playing impressively then cite them. You'll note that no-one has disagreed with the content of what you've said (even when it has been a matter of opinion), its the way you say it and the lack of cites that's the problem. If your edits were to be taken as acceptable then we'd also have to have to accept contributions from someone describing her wins as "lucky" or "unsporting". Without cites they'd be just as valid as what you're saying. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed 2006 information

User 172.143.183.232 seems to revert virtually every edit I make to the Sharapova article. So, I am proposing a revision of the 2006 information here in case anyone is interested.

At the Australian Open, Sharapova lost in the semifinals to Justine Henin 4-6, 6-1, 6-4, the only match of the year that Sharapova lost after winning the first set.

Sharapova claimed her first title of 2006 and eleventh of her career at the Tier I Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells, California. She defeated fourth-seeded Elena Dementieva in the final 6-1, 6-2.

Sharapova then lost in the final of the Tier I Sony Ericsson Open to Svetlana Kuznetsova.

Sharapova participated at the French Open without having played any of the clay court tune-ups because of injury. After saving three match points in the first round against Mashona Washington, Sharapova was eliminated in the fourth round by Dinara Safina 7-5, 2-6, 7-5, after Sharapova led 5-1 in the third set. Sharapova lost 18 of the match's last 21 points.

Sharapova then started the grass court season but failed to add a third successive Birmingham title to her collection, losing in the semifinals to American Jamea Jackson. At Wimbledon, Sharapova was defeated in the semifinals for the second consecutive year, losing to eventual winner and World No. 1 Amélie Mauresmo 6-3, 3-6, 6-2.

Sharapova claimed her second title of 2006 at the Tier I Acura Classic in San Diego, defeating top-seeded Kim Clijsters 7-5, 7-5. This was Sharapova's first victory over Clijsters in five meetings. She then played in Los Angeles, losing to Dementieva in the semifinals. This was Sharapova's only summer hardcourt loss of the year.

Sharapova was the third-seed at the U.S. Open. She defeated Tatiana Golovin 7-6, 7-6 in the quarterfinals before defeating Mauresmo in a semifinal 6-0, 4-6, 6-0. Sharapova then prevailed over second-ranked Henin in the final 6-4, 6-4 to win her second Grand Slam singles title, having dropped just one set en route and joining the list of eight players who had beaten the top two players in the world to win a Grand Slam singles title.[citation needed]

Sharapova then won two tournaments in consecutive weeks. At the Tier I Zurich Open, Sharapova defeated Daniela Hantuchová in the final. At the Generali Ladies Linz, Sharapova beat fellow Russian and defending champion Nadia Petrova to take her fifth title of 2006 and the 15th title of her career.

Until her loss in the semifinals of the WTA Tour Championships to Henin, Sharapova had won 19 consecutive matches. She finished the year at World No. 2 and, for the second year, as the top Russian player. During the year, she compiled a 59-9 record and won five titles (second only to Henin's six), including three Tier I titles, more than any other player.

Tennis expert (talk) 22:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed 2005 information

User 172.143.183.232 seems to revert virtually every edit I make to the Sharapova article, in violation of WP:OWN in my opinion (he says that my edits are "rude" to him). Anyway, I am proposing a revision of the 2005 information here in case anyone is interested.

Sharapova started the year by reaching the semifinals of the Australian Open, where she lost to eventual champion Serena Williams 2-6, 7-5, 8-6, despite holding three match points.

In February, Sharapova won her first Tier 1 event in Tokyo. Three weeks later, she won the tournament in Doha. To complete the spring hard court season, Sharapova reached the semifinals of the Tier I Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells, California and the final of the Tier I Sony Ericsson Open in Key Biscayne, Florida.

Sharapova participated in two of the clay court tune-ups for the French Open. She lost in the quarterfinals of the Qatar Telecom German Open in Berlin to Justine Henin and the semifinals of the Italian Open in Rome to Patty Schnyder. At the French Open, Sharapova lost in the quarterfinals for the second consecutive year, falling to Henin, the eventual champion.

On grass, Sharapova successfully defended her Birmingham title, defeating Jelena Janković in the final to extend her winning streak on grass to 19 matches. She then was unsuccessful in defending her Wimbledon title. She reached the semifinals without losing a set, where she lost to Venus Williams, the eventual champion.

Lindsay Davenport injured her back in the Wimbledon final, preventing her from defending the ranking points she obtained during the U.S. hard-court season of 2004. Sharapova had fewer points to defend and therefore rose to the World No. 1 ranking on August 22, 2005. She was the first Russian woman to hold the position. Her reign lasted only one week, however, as Davenport re-ascended to the top ranking after winning the title in New Haven.

At the U.S. Open, Sharapova lost in the semifinals to eventual champion Kim Clijsters. Sharapova lost to the eventual champion in all four Grand Slam events of 2005. Nevertheless, the points she accumulated at the U.S. Open meant that she once again leapfrogged Davenport to take the World No. 1 ranking on September 12, 2005. She kept that ranking for six weeks before relinquishing it again to Davenport following the Zurich Open.

Sharapova failed to defend her title at the season-ending WTA Tour Championships, losing in the semifinals to eventual champion Amelie Mauresmo.

Sharapova finished the year ranked World No. 4 again and as the top-ranked Russian for the first time. She won three titles during the year and was the only player in 2005 to reach three Grand Slam semifinals.

Tennis expert (talk) 23:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed 2001-2004 information

User 172.143.183.232 seems to revert virtually every edit I make to the Sharapova article, in violation of WP:OWN in my opinion (he says that my edits are "rude" to him). Anyway, I am proposing a revision of the 2001-2004 information here in case anyone is interested.

===2001-2003: Early promise===

Sharapova turned professional in 2001, although she played a total of just two WTA tournaments in 2001 and 2002 plus six challenger events. She started playing tour events full-time in 2003. She won three qualifying matches at both the Australian Open and the French Open to reach the main draw, although she lost in the first round in both events. She received a wild card into the main draw at Wimbledon, losing in the fourth round to compatriot Svetlana Kuznetsova 6-1, 2-6, 7-5 after defeating the 21st seed and the 11th seed in the second and third rounds, respectively. Sharapova then lost in the second round of the U.S. Open to Emilie Loit.

In October, Sharapova won her first title at the Tier III tournament in Tokyo and then won her second Tier III tournament four weeks later in Quebec City. She finished the year at World No. 32 and was named the WTA Newcomer of the Year.

===2004: Breakthrough year===

Sharapova started the year by reaching the third round of the Australian Open, where she lost to seventh-seeded Anastasia Myskina 6-4, 1-6, 6-2. The week after the Australian Open, Sharapova lost in the second round of the Tier I Toray Pan Pacific Open in Tokyo to Daniela Hantuchova. She then returned to the United States for three hard court tournaments, reaching the semifinals in Memphis, the fourth round at the Tier I Pacific Life Open in Indian Wells, California, and the fourth round of the Tier I Sony Ericsson Open in Key Biscayne, Florida.

During the spring clay court season leading up to the French Open, Sharapova lost in the third round at both Berlin and Rome, which were both Tier I events. At the French Open, Sharapova reached the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam singles tournament for the first time in her career, losing to Paola Suarez 6-1, 6-3.

The tour then switched to grass courts in the lead up to Wimbledon. In Birmingham, Sharapova defeated Tatiana Golovin to win the title.

The 17-year-old Sharapova went into Wimbledon as the thirteenth seed. She reached her second consecutive Grand Slam quarterfinal, where she defeated Ai Sugiyama 5-7, 7-5, 6-1, and then upset fifth-seeded and former World No. 1 Lindsay Davenport in the semifinals 2-6, 7-6, 6-1. She then faced two-time defending champion Serena Williams in the final, with Williams the heavy favorite. Sharapova, however, caused one of the biggest upsets in Wimbledon history by beating Williams 6-1, 6-4, to become the third-youngest Wimbledon women's champion (after Lottie Dod and Martina Hingis) and second-youngest in the open era. She was the first Russian to win the tournament and was, at the time, the lowest seed to win the women's event. (Venus Williams was seeded lower when she won the tournament subsequently in 2005 and 2007.)

During the North American summer hard court season leading up to the U.S. Open, Sharapova played three tournaments. She lost to Myskina in the quarterfinals of the Tier I tournament in San Diego. She lost to Vera Zvonareva in the third round of the Tier I tournament in Montreal. And she lost in the second round of the tournament in New Haven.

At the U.S. Open, Sharapova lost to French player and two-time Grand Slam champion Mary Pierce in the third round 4-6, 6-2, 6-3. During the tournament, Sharapova and several other Russian women tennis players wore a black ribbon in observance of the tragedy after the Beslan school hostage crisis, which took place only a few days before.[4]

Sharapova then played three tournaments in Asia. She lost to Svetlana Kuznetsova in the semifinals of the China Open in Beijing. During the next two weeks, Sharapova won the Tier IV tournament in Seoul, South Korea and successfully defended her Tokyo title.

Before returning to the United States, Sharapova reached her first Tier I final in Zurich, losing to Alicia Molik. At the Tier II tournament in Philadelphia, Sharapova reached the semifinals before defaulting her match to Amelie Mauresmo. Sharapova then ended the year by winning the WTA Tour Championships. She defeated an injured Serena Williams in the final after being down 4-0 in the final set. After losing to Sharapova in a semifinal of this event, Myskina said: "He [Sharapova's father] was just yelling and screaming instructions to her and I thought he just might jump right on the court at one point in the match."

Sharapova finished 2004 ranked World No. 4 and was the second-ranked Russian (behind Myskina). She won five titles during the year, trailing only Davenport's seven and equaling Justine Henin's total. Sharapova also topped the prize winnings list for the year.

Tennis expert (talk) 02:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Proposed Wins information

I think that the table should say how old she was when she won her grand slams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.164.16.116 (talk) 14:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Length of Article

It is my opinion that the article even in as it is is already too long, let alone adding additional material. As she is only 20, Sharapova presumably has many years of her career left, yet already, the article is very long (one of the longest articles I visit regularly) so God knows how long it will be a few years down the line. An article of this length is simply not appealing to people, and a lot of the information is in truth unnecessary. It also means that no context is provided to spectacular successes; the way all results are included makes a third round loss at a tournament in (for example) Moscow look as significant as winning Wimbledon. My proposal is that we retain 2003-2005 as it is, and move 2006/2007/2008 more towards the format for Roger Federer's page; a more "compact" version, stating Grand Slam results, other tournament wins, and any other results that are truly significant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musiclover565 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Instead of doing a drive-by revert multiple times, why don't you EDIT the article to delete the exact information that you believe is unnecessary. By the way, this article is well-within Wikipedia article length guidelines and it is no where near one of the longest articles on Wikipedia. But if length becomes a problem in the future, we can deal with it appropriately at that time. Tennis expert (talk) 22:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps you should have actually consulted other editors of the page before pressing ahead with your overhaul of the article. You may consider what I'm doing vandalism; I personally consider it unreasonable for you to completely rewrite the article without consulting the other regular editors of the page, and truth be told, rather ill-mannered to completely disregard the hard work that other people (myself included) have put in, without even pointing out valid flaws (feel free to point out how you think it is flawed at this time, because I see no flaws). You may consider the length of your proposed edit reasonable, but I do not, and neither of our opinions take precedence over the other. Therefore, I suggest we wait for others' opinions on the best course of action, and in the meantime, maintain the article which most of the regular editors have agreed is suitable for many months now, in line with common etiquette. Musiclover565 (talk) 23:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Neither you nor I own the article, so I don't understand the "etiquette" or "ill-mannered" arguments. Have you actually looked at my edits? Far from being "suitable" (your words), the article was full of problems. I've deleted the huge amounts of unsourced opinion and match commentary that previous editors, perhaps including yourself, inserted and that caused the "magazine-style" tag to be attached to the article. I made numerous factual corrections to the article. For example, look at the 2001 information and compare it to the previous erroneous assertion that Sharapova turned professional in 2002. I balanced the article with representative results from throughout each year. It should not be your objective to just highlight her "spectacular successes" (your words). If you want context, add it. If you want to delete material, delete it. But your reversions are throwing out the huge amounts of good that my edits have done. By the way, I gave advance warning of those edits on this very discussion page. Sorry you apparently missed it. Have you actually calculated how much longer my edits made the article? On balance, the additional length is hardly significant (less than 5 percent). Finally, have a look at WP:BOLD. Tennis expert (talk) 23:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC), updated by Tennis expert (talk) 00:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC), updated again by Tennis expert (talk) 00:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
If neither you or I own the article, then how can you object to me reverting your edits? I am merely what you did when you rewrote such a huge part of the article, so how you can find fault in my actions bewilders me. You are also yet to point out a substantial amount of flaws in the article. You say there is unsourced opinion and match commentary - show me some? You say there are numerous factual errors - where? The error re: when she turned professional has now been corrected, so please, correct any other errors you see, but please do not do such a complete overhaul until others have agreed.
You say you gave advance warning. I check this page fairly regularly, and I had not seen your proposed edits until they actually appeared on the page. And indeed, by the look of it, no-one else had green-lighted your proposed edits before you pressed ahead with them. I'm guessing you gave warning of about a few hours at most? Which simply isn't enough time.
The fact your edits only add 5% to the article is not the point. I believe it to already be too long, and therefore, I believe 2006/2007 should be downsized, let alone adding more material. I'll repeat what I said before: neither of our opinions take precedence over the other, and therefore, we should wait for others' opinions. Musiclover565 (talk) 14:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
My thoughts; Yes the article is too long, so Musiclover565 has a point. We don't need a complete break-down of every tournament and every result, there are tables on the page that show that information, if necessary, far more concisely than prose. However, I personally prefer Tennis expert text, as it's cleaner and more encyclopaedic. This is probably as much because it's a re-write and hasn't been mucked about by multiple editors as the existing text. So, what I'm saying your are both right. So please come to a compromise. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Guys, guys, please stop reverting each other's edits. Musiclover565 has already violated the 3RR rule. Just keep it on the talk page please. BanRay 17:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm leaving this article because there apparently is overwhelming consensus to keep the article as it was before I revised it. I can't keep reverting it by myself to counteract the excessive reversions by Musiclover565 and by, I assume, his anonymous IP account. But just for the sake of argument, let's count the unsourced POV in this version of the article: (1) "excellent double-handed backhand" (2) "good forehand" (3) "excels on the fast-playing grass and hard courts" (4) "among the strongest of defensive players" (5) "not a natural volleyer" (6) "powerful 'swinging' volley" (7) "very difficult for her opponents" (8) "incredible strain on her shoulder" (9) "one of the most accurate double-handed backhand shots" (10) "She finished a very successful first full year" (11) "Williams the runaway favorite" (12) "one of the biggest upsets in Wimbledon history" (13) "Sharapova continued her successful season" (14) "success in Doha" (15) "well beaten by a rejuvenated Venus Williams" (16) "Sharapova welcomed the onset of the grass season" (17) "many believe that this win was the turnaround for this season" (18) "Favored to reach the final" (19) "struggled past Tatiana Golovin" (20) "overpowered an injured Sharapova" (21) "Sharapova then achieved disappointing results" (22) "decimated the effectiveness of her serve" (23) "she was crushed by Serena Williams for the second successive time with a lopsided scoreline" (24) "up-and-comer Ana Ivanović" (25) "progressed to the final relatively easily" (26) "more favorable bottom half of the draw" (27) "was tipped to at least reach the final" (28) "raced through her first two matches" (29) "poor serving and a host of unforced errors" (30) "Her performance at the tournament was considered an excellent end to a modest season overall" (31) "as one of the favourites to take the title after her strong end-of-season showing." Aside from the POV, there is a ton of unencylopedic, awkward, and inconsistent wording in the article. I worked hard to make this article deserving of Wikipedia, to no avail - see this version. Tennis expert (talk) 05:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Umm, no, your version is much better and everyone seems to agree on that. I might also request an IP check on Musiclover. Please restore your version, but don't forget to include all the constructive edits made sinceyour last revision. Meanwhile I will try to get the page protected. BanRay 10:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Like I've said before, I believe the article should be shorter, and therefore, I've "compacted" all the sections. Of course, as common manners dictates, I would've ordinarily put my proposed edits on the discussion page for approval first, but if the common policy on here is just to rewrite without consulting everyone else, then...
Tennis expert - please do not mindlessly revert my edits. I suggest you take your own advice, and edit certain parts which you feel need editing, but don't revert the whole thing. Musiclover565 (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and just things for the record; Ban Ray - how does "everyone seem to agree" Tennis expert's version is better? The only person to have given their opinion is Escape Orbit, who was pretty neutral overall.
Tennis expert - re: the number of POV comments you cited from the Playing style section - a section on Playing style is invariably going to be an analytical piece, containing widely agreed opinions (it would be different to say "Sharapova has the best serve in the history of tennis"; to say her best surfaces are hard and grass is fine because the results clearly show this). If you think you can write a 100% neutral Playing style section, feel free, because I'd imagine it would be incredibly difficult.
Furthermore, the majority of the other "POV comments" you cited, are NOT POV. To say she was widely tipped to reach the final isn't POV if she was. Neither is it POV to say she won her first two matches easily, if the scorelines were 6-0 6-1. It might be a different story if I wrote for, say, the Radwankska loss, "Sharapova lost because she was playing poorly. It is widely agreed that if Sharapova was playing her best, she would have won easily." Musiclover565 (talk) 11:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid you still don't seem to understand the problem with your text, Musiclover565. Please let me spell it out (I'm not trying to insult you here, I just want to make it clear). It is POV to say "she was widely tipped to reach the final" if you can not or do not provide a reputable cite that says exactly this. Why? Because all we have is your word on it. It could just as easily be your opinion and not fact at all. How is the reader to know? Maybe only a few people thought she would reach the final. Maybe those people were highly biased or unqualified to have any opinion worth reporting. Who knows? We have no reputable cite to guide us. It doesn't matter if you are 100% right, and it doesn't matter if everyone here agrees with you; it is an opinion that hints vaguely about being supported by a wider authority, but can't produce it. The reader deserves better than this.
You can also take all of the above as an argument about what's wrong with an analysis of playing style "containing widely agreed opinions". Agreed by who? Again we have a mass of experts whose views you claim to be representing, but are unreferenced and unnamed. Perhaps they don't exist? Who knows? Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, but my opinion and analysis is as irrelevant as yours without cites.
It is also POV to say "she won her first two matches easily" without a reputable cite. No matter what the score. Maybe she scrapped through every match after a dozen dueces. Maybe she should have won far more easily. Maybe it was a stroll in the park for her. We don't know, and it's not for you to say. Without a full match report by a qualified person to cite, you are far better to report the score and let the facts speak for themselves.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Escape Orbit, have you seen the new edits I was putting in today (which BanRay has been reverting, because apparently, I should wait for others' approval before doing so... despite Tennis expert not asking for others' opinions before going ahead with his more radical edits a few weeks ago... figure that one out)? Even though I disagree with things like "widely agreed to reach the final" being POV, I've largely removed most of those in line with others' concensus. I just looked again, and the only one left I can really see is one about the 2007 US Open, which I would remove if BanRay agrees to permit my edits.
Like I said earlier, I kind of agree that Playing style is pretty POV, but again, there's not really any way you can make that type of section unanalytical (it's probably more balanced than most other similar sections on other tennis articles). 92.3.230.33 (talk) 21:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC) (Musiclover565) - (my computer keeps logging me out for some reason)
the otehr version is so much cleaner and more relevant - who cares about a 3rd round result in rome in 2004 ffs?! i suppose banray will accuse me of being musickliover565 aswell?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.236.104 (talk) 09:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
If one doesn't care about accuracy, clear and encyclopedic writing, impartiality, and grammar, then, yeah, the "otehr" version is better. Who cares about a 3rd round result in "rome" in 2004 or that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia instead of a sports magazine when what's really important is making the article flashy and hip? Ugh. Tennis expert (talk) 19:15, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Re:BanRay's reason for reverting an earlier edit by someone else - it's not Wikipedia policy to wait for concenusus, and I'm pretty sure you know it. And if it is, then I think Tennis expert broke it several weeks ago by rewriting the Career section, no?
Tennis expert - please say WHY the current version is accurate/unencyclopaedic/etc. Just because it's not your work doesn't make it bad. Remember we're all just trying to improve the article. Masha4ever (talk) 23:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Quit trolling and being disruptive. This already has been discussed. You got banned earlier for these disruptive edits. Stop making them. Tennis expert (talk) 00:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it has now been established that I did not deserve to be blocked, as the offence I was blocked for (reverting 64 edits) proved to be false. So in fact, it is you who is trolling, and I therefore propose you restore my constructive edit, unless you can give solid reasons for them not to take place. Masha4ever (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Again, established by whom? You were blocked for trolling, disruption and vandalism. Your edits and your WP:AN complaint have been reviewed by three administrators, apart from the blocking admin. It is wikipedia policy to wait for consensus in controversial cases, especially during an edit war, so please stop or otherwise you are well on your way to another block. BanRay 00:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What's the deal with the name

Vast majority of non-english namesget butchered to some degree in English, especially when we don't have a certain pronounciation in English(rolling "r" sound in spanish, for instance). Really is a trvial detail her name is mispronounced, so much so I doubt it needs included in her wiki at all, least of all in the intro section. Finally, the person whom a given name belongs to is the sole person who gets to decide on the exact pronounciation of their name, and she prefers the English-friendly version, making it the CORRECT version.66.190.29.150 (talk) 09:54, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

My original note was about the correct pronunciation. Somebody corrected, saying, it's "commonly" pronounced, I had to correct this. I still think it's worth mentioning the pronunciation but not the fact it's mispronounced. The way R's are trilled is a different matter, we are talking about syllable stress. For some reason commentators worry more about getting Spanish, French, Italian names right but not Russian --Atitarev (talk) 10:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I just don't think that Sharapova's wiki should be yourr, or anyone else's,for that matter, place to grind an axe that is not her own. She prefers the English-friendly version, that makes it the correct pronounciation regardless of how it is usually pronounced in Russia. 66.190.29.150 (talk) 10:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The Wiki is not yours either and it wasn't a friendly comment. The correct pronunciation is some respect to the person, it's not a trivial matter and I am not grinding any axes. The wording can be changed, no need to mention the incorrect accent. Those who respect Maria, might as well learn where to put the stress in her name, which happens with some commentators. --Atitarev (talk) 10:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The original statement was unsourced, when did Sharapova say this? I've removed this and said that it is simply the way it is pronounced in Russia, although that too needs a cite. Whether the English-speaker's pronunciation is "correct" or not is equally uncited, so looks like a point of view. I've removed this and just left the pronunciation as a statement of fact. The entire sentence can be removed if no-one comes up with decent cites, and it shouldn't be restored to its previous wording unless someone can produce a cite. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

See section "Pronunciation revisited". What kind of a source is required? The Russian page doesn't even show the pronunciation because no Russian would pronounce it different from Sharápova (Шара́пова). I also think that the demand for citations must be reasonable. I am a native speaker and I assure you Maria would agree with the accent. Having said this, I agree to your latest comment, let's wait for some citations. --Atitarev (talk) 12:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The older australian guy for the ESPN coverage team of the australian open said that last year shen he pronounced Sharapova's name the way it would be normally pronounced in Russia, that afterwards she told him that she now prefers the common versions that everyone knows her by today because it's easier for English speakers to say. 66.190.29.150 (talk) 18:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prize Money

When wil someone change the prize money, it's been a week (today) that she has the extra 1.2(or 1.3) million dollars, from winning Australia and it's still at what it's been since WTA Tour Championships. Sharapova1 (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

So is it 1.2 or 1.3? Source please. BanRay 20:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rexona

Maria also stars inRexona advertisments and acts as this brand's face, pretty much like she does for SonyEricsson. Someone's got to reflect this. Netrat_msk (talk) 23:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Endorsements

The opening paragraph mentions that her commercial endorsements greatly exceeds her tournament winnings. Since this is true for most major sports personalities (Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Andre Agassi, etc) and thus not that notable, I have removed the sentence to the Endorsement section. Okadoz (talk) 18:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

(1) If an article is notable, not everything in it also has to be notable. (2) We are talking about a female tennis player, not a male tennis player, male basketball player, or male golfer. (3) The opening paragraph is well-sourced. Tennis expert (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
According to Sports Illustrated, of the top 50 highest-paid athletes, all male, only 10 have endorsements greater than their winnings, while another 6 are close. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)