Talk:Serena Williams
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page about a living person is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, which collaborates on Tennis-related subjects on Wikipedia, such as players, tournaments and rules. To participate, help improve this page or visit the project page for details on the project. Please keep the policy for biography of living people in mind when editing the article. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Sports and games work group. | ||
 |
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. | ||||||
 |
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. | ||||||
|
|||||||
[edit] Reference in Gold Digger?
Is the line "she gotta have an ass like Serena" in Kanye West's Gold Digger definitely referring to her? And if so, is there a place to put it in (perhaps trivia or something)?
[edit] Jehovah's Witness?
Is she really one of Jehovah's Witnesses? If not, it is not right to put the article in the category Jehovah's Witnesses people. Summer Song 21:32, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
- From my reading both her, her sister, her mother (but _not_ her father) are Witnesses. http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org/williamsdivorce.htm <-2000. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/11/80777/1318124/post.ashx#1318124 <-2006 they still seem to be attending 220.253.86.204 08:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC) (MSN jpshift@hotmail.com)
[edit] Serena life
She may be and she may not be. But that's her life and we should leave it alone.
[edit] Gay Icon?
She can't be both Gay and a Jehovah's Witness as the JW faith is opposed to homosexuality. So if she is indeed a gay icon then this is indeed ironic and this irony is worthy of being mentioned in the article - if someone is willing to work it in somehow. I doubt people who see her as a gay icon are aware of her anti-gay predudice. 220.253.86.204 08:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- (1) Being a "gay icon" does not mean you're gay. (2) She's never made a homophobic statement in her public. Please don't attribute a way of thought to her with no basis for doing so. (3) I think in reading gay publications, and references I've seen to her would qualify her as a gay icon. I don't necessarily care if it's on her page or not. I can't tell you the number of Serena drag queens I've seen on Halloween in San Francisco over the years...it would blow your mind! Agrippina Minor
[edit] Gau?
In the Fashion section is this sentence: "Again at gau had a special line at Puma and has a current one at Nike." I cannot figure out what is meant by "gau". This needs to be edited if others cannot understand this.
[edit] Uh, what?
Why does it say 'titty!' at the end of the Entertainment section? at the end of Fashion it says that she has nice thighs and ass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.5.151 (talk) 02:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Weight?
She can't possibly weigh 135lbs but the 6000lbs entry is so not funny! Please change.
I know Serena's had some weight/fitness issues over the past couple of years, so what is her weight exactly? Some wikipedians insist that its 165 lb, while the WTA tour website claims 135 lb...so until someone can verify her weight, I'm changing it to the verifiable weight (135).
RE: Weight, She cannot possibly weigh 135 lb or 165 lb for that matter. WTA has been quite off about the weight of the players in the past for some reason. I think we should put a ? or N/A to encourage more people to find out exactly how much she weighs.
When I Click on Serena's profile in the US Open website, it says that she is 143 lbs. (65 kilos). I think that we should use this info as it is the most recent. Ô 01:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I guess you are right, we have what we have. We can not eye ball her and come up with a weight we think is right, no matter how much we think she weighs around 200 lb.
Good grief, if Wikipedia is to be taken seriously, don't try to tell me that Serena weighs 135 lbs. She hasn't weighed 135 pounds since she was 11. Is this site fact or fiction? Julia Roberts is the same height, 5'9", and admits to 135 pounds. A woman of that height who weighs 135 is slender. Look at Julia, then look at Serena. Get serious.
- To the person who keeps changing the weight, lol , please discuss with us as to where you're getting this information. Let's be mature here...The most recent information about her weight says that she is 143 lbs. Let's leave it at that until we get a newer update, thanks. Ô 00:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, 143 lbs. Right. Have you actually seen this woman? Her own website says 130. Do you believe that too? I guess that makes it official. If she claimed to be Albino, would that be on Wikipedia as well? Tell ya what. Find a lady in your office, or your family who will admit to 135, or 143 pounds. Look her over. And then look at Serena. My gosh, Serena weighs 135...from the waist down. Better yet, do a Google search, and read what various sportswriters have observed about Serena's weight...which they jokingly refer to as "listed at 135 pounds....but obviously much heavier." This is almost as good as Whoopi Goldberg claiming to be born in 1956, when various people have produced records and evidence indicating she's off by 7 years. But apparently if a famous person wants to lie, some Wikipedians buy it, hook line and sinker.
- Look IP address, this is an encyclopedia based upon actual sources, not just random assumptions. So, if you care so much that the WTA and Serena Williams are lying about their weight--go complain to them, and stop adding questionable information to Wikipedia. So, no source, no change--the heaviest she weighs has been indicated by one source to be 143 lbs., and that's what is going to be used! ---Flute138 16:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- 143 pounds, of course. Her weight will always change. However I bet you didn't know that this recent information came from the WTA which is a Womens Tennis Association and organizes all the players profile, which includes the most recent weight height, prize money, etc. So in response to your question, yes she is 143 pounds, and no, it's not false info. Ô 20:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, since when the WTA weight info became a reliable source and to whom? Do you believe your own eyes? WTA lowers the weight data for all female athletes because the weight data is not important in tennis. Nobody would do this in boxing where weight must be official. You can either make a reasonable estimate (which is btw possible to do with high precision based on her height and build) or leave the field unknown in case there’s no reliable source of this info. But WTA is not a reliable source of weight data!--Egorpan 21:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
-
To the person who is changing the weight, your reference leads to an article made in 2000 ^ http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0016,john,14209,3.html so that is obviously not recent and your second refernce "^ Ibid" doesn't link to anything so how are we suppose to know that you're giving correct information. Whereas the information from the WTA is more recent http://www.usopen.org/en_US/bios/profile/ws/wtaw234.html This info was from the 2006 US Open and states the most recent info on her weight, height, etc. So inother words, if you're going to change the weight, height, give valid and recent proof Ô 20:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I'll settle on 143 until I find a reliable source that actually has her correct weight. Stanley011 21:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh. So you're reliably saying she has LOST 22 pounds since 2000. Gee, I wonder why all the sportswriters who SEE her every week say otherwise?
- I'm not saying she reliably weighs 143. I'm saying that's what the most reliable, up to date source, the us open 2006 site, has her as weighing. I personally believe that she weighs more than this but until I can find an up to date source that shows this, wikipedia policy prohibits adding it to the article. Stanley011 19:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I've got to hand it to Laila Ali, daughter of Muhammad, and a boxer in her own right. She is the same height as Serena, and admits to 170 pounds....and yet she is thinner and less muscular than the "143 lbs." Serena. It's refreshing to know that some female athletes are honest about their weight.
In the new People magazine, Tyra Banks, who is also the same height as Serena, says her weight is 161 pounds. Look at Tyra. Then look at Serena. See if you think Tyra weighs 18 pounds MORE than Serena. Thanks for being honest, Tyra.
- That's nice... Why are you guys making this such a big deal? If you strongly believe that Serena is NOT 143lbs, than go on the internet, and find a recent and reliable source. That's all you got to do. Ô 23:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Webpage http://www.usopen.org/en_US/bios/profile/ws/wtaw234.html does not seem to be available. Anyway, using outdated information regarding her weight because noone can find any current information is not the way to go. If a piece of information is not known, it should be left blank. Q43 19:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Let's be realistic on the weight issue. Comparing Serena with Tyra Banks and Julia Roberts is not going to cut it. Most people are making assumptions on Serena's weight based on photos and television. Track and field athlete Marion Jones (5'11"; 155) is around the same size as Serena for instance but just a tad taller. The key thing to remember here is perspective. When you place Serena next to most other female tennis players, the difference is staggering, but when placed next to a male or say even a female track athlete, it strikes a balance. Remember weight is based on muscle, fat, and height; but more importantly the distribution of it.
Sorry to bump the old topic, but does anyone have a reliable source for her real weight? The only ones I could find were taken from Wikipedia. RJaguar3 | u | t 13:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- According to her player profile at the 2007 Wimbledon website, it says that she is 143 lbs...http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/bios/profile/ws/wtaw234.html. So just leave it @ 143 lbs unless you find a more recent, reliable source. Ô 01:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- I don't really care which weight it listed myself, but I also saw 135 lbs listed and thought "Huh? There is no way." My daughter is 5'10", 145 lbs and she is pretty darn thin. Considerably thinner than Serena (at least judging by TV), and not nearly as muscular. I'd be really surprised if Serena weighs less than 165 lbs, but thats not a bad thing, she has an amazing build. - JSDA
The reason why people are making a big deal about this is that she is NOWHERE near 135 lbs. Judging by her pictures on ESPN, TV, Google, etc - I would say that it's fairly clear that she's closer to 235 than 135. Just because a person can type the three numbers "1" "3" and "5" does not render Serena to be 135 lbs, just as me going to Michael Jordan's talk page and saying that he is ethnically South Korean doesn't make him SK. - rock8591
[edit] 1998
This section does not make sense: "1998 was the first year that Williams finished in the WTA top 20. She began the season in Sydney as a qualifier, ranked no. 96, and beat world no. 3 Lindsay Davenport in a quarterfinal. With her top 20 ranking, Williams was then expected to do well in her first Grand Slam tournament."
If she was ranked 96 at the beginning of the year and 20 at the end, then we cannot say "with her top 20 ranking, Williams was expected to do well in her first Grand Slam tournament." If the preceeding sentence is correct, she did not have a top 20 ranking yet. She had a 96 ranking. 72.85.189.224 04:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe after reaching the semis or further in Sydney, she improved to a top-20 ranking? If that is the case, some clarity is needed. If not, fact-checking.
71.112.87.13 03:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Controversy
Since nothing came of this and it is nothing more than an unsubstantiated allegation shouldn't it be removed?
--Posting the stuff about the Sharapova overhead that hit Serena is definitely going too far. That happens all the time in tennis. If we referenced everytime that happened on every tennis player's page it would fill them up. Agrippina Minor
- Quite right, but was it necessary to remove the entire 'Controversy' section? It was completely unbiased in writing, I just don't see why it was removed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Redlands597198 (talk • contribs) 05:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC).
-
- The claim was never substantiated. I think it's sensationalist gossip thought up by Channel 7 (which has less than perfect journalistic integrity). Nothing ever came of it and her opponent denied that it happened. What is the "controversy?" Agrippina Minor
-
-
- The "controversy" is that allegations were made. Surely the fact that both players were questioned on the matter and it was briefly investigated by tennis officials has something to do with it - the fact that both players denied the claims and that tennis officials did not investigate any further does not make it uncontroversial.
- The dictionary definition of "controversy" is: a prolonged public dispute, debate, or contention. This incident was a public dispute, it was a debate, it was a contention. I don't see why it is uncontroversial just because nothing ever came of it. Redlands597198 23:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- What part of "prolonged" do you not understand. This was one lousy allegation that died in a day. Not a controversy. Agrippina Minor
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I understand "prolonged". Prolonged, according to the dictionary: 1. To prolong: to lengthen in extent. 2. Prolonged: an extended discussion. This "allegation" or "controversy" fits both of these criteria. The initial allegations made on the Channel Seven commentary were "lengthened in extent" and the "discussion was extended" when tennis officials decided to investigate the matter further. In this context, "prolonged" is not referring to the actual amount of time spent on the matter; it is referring plainly to whether or not the allegations were taken to another step, hence the discussion being extended. Therefore controversial. Redlands597198 16:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- It was reported by ONE media outlet. Both players denied it. There was no investigation by tennis officials, that reported information was later refuted by the tour and the tournament. Therefore it was not prolonged. These turned out to be unfounded allegations, and the story lasted no longer than a day. Drop it. Agrippina Minor
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- There was an investigation by the Tennis Australia officials. And the fact that both players denied it really has nothing to do with it - Williams: If she was aware of what the member of her entourage was doing, and it was intentional, then why would she admit to it? Vaidisova: She wouldn't have even noticed it. As was reported on a number of TV networks, the chances of actually getting the light to hit her eyes were incredibly slim.
- The controversy of it all is that the allegations were made. Not to say I believe this, but even if they were false allegations, it was still controversial. I really don't understand what's uncontroversial about the whole incident. Could you please explain to me, in a very straight-forward manner, why this was not a controversy. Redlands597198 05:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Maybe you're new to tennis or something, but if every time something like this happened it made it onto the "controversy" section of a tennis player's wiki page, it would fill up the entire page. My suspicions are that you must be new to tennis since you wanted to post Maria hitting Serena with an overhead as a "controversy." Likewise, when players curse it is not a "controversy" as you tried to post that as well. This was an extremely minor event. If you want to include controversy here, why not edit in when Serena was called a "n*gger" by fans at Indian Wells the last time she played there, when they almost booed her off the court. Or how about the time Serena was serving in the semifinals of Roland Garros and her opponent put her hand up mid serve and Serena wasn't given a second serve and went on to lose the match before a very angry Paris crowd. Those were "controversies" that were widely reported and discussed for months (years) afterwards. The incident you refer to as a "controversy" were unsubstantiated allegations and nothing more. Since they were unsubstatiated, they should REMAIN unsubstantiated...and not be recorded here. Agrippina Minor
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Speaking of which, I think it's good you brought up the controversy on the Indian Wells and French Open incident. Those would be good things to add. Even the line call incident at the 2004 US Open when she played Jennifer Capriati can be put into a "Controversy" section. What do you think? Ô 00:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[edit] Needs more citations
This really needs more citations. I'm tempted to go through it all and add fact tags, I really think someone should look through this and add them where needed. Statements like where I already added one would be a good place to start. Thanks. Disinclination 20:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Added the template to address your concerns, which is far better than putting [citation needed] at the end of every sentence. Tennis expert 20:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Why is the term "Serena Slam" notable?
I do not understand the notability of Serena Williams calling her non-calendar year win of four consecutive Grand Slam singles titles a "Serena Slam." Other players have accomplished the same thing without assigning a pet name to it. I believe the term should be deleted from this article as non-notable. Tennis expert 20:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'd say the way it's mentioned is NPOV. The article factually states that Serena elevates her accomplishment above identical feats. It doesn't agree with her or adopt the phrase "Serena Slam" outside of quotation. The way the information is presented, one could infer that Serena Williams is an accomplished tennis player, or that she is at the summit of athletic hubris, which is my conclusion. It reflects very poorly on her if you ask me, but I'm sure others feel differently. The article leaves judgment to the reader, for the most part; it might, however, be fair to state that Serena Williams was not the first person to win four consecutive Grand Slams on separate calendar years. Yano 19:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
-- wow.. are you really a tennis expert?? ive seen your credentials and a person with that much in his profile shouldnt be stating these statements about the SERENA SLAM.. oh my.. im really laughing at your post here.. and i know im not the only one.. <unsigned comment>
[edit] Was she born a man?
I saw this news article http://dlisted.com/?p=7054 and then I came here. Serena may be transgender or have taken steroids. SakotGrimshine 03:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- you actually believe in this crap? and no, my edit wasnt vandelism Ô 13:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- If she is female as you suspect, likely she takes steroids. Do you dissagree? The article, of course, says nothing to affirm or deny this. SakotGrimshine 15:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please don't waste our time. Even if she was taking steroids, she would not be playing tennis, just like Sesil Karatantcheva. These players get tested all the time. I'm sure they would have caught her by now if she was taking steroids, but obviously she's not since it's all natural. And also, this is all vandelism since you're bringing in false information. Please don't bring this up again... Ô 21:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- If she is female as you suspect, likely she takes steroids. Do you dissagree? The article, of course, says nothing to affirm or deny this. SakotGrimshine 15:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I asked on the reference desk and someone said, "It's extremely unlikey she was a he; they would have had to alter records all the way back to her birth. As for steroids, tennis actually seems to have a good testing procedure; Sesil Karatantcheva and Karol Beck have been caught and banned in recent years, and a top level player like Serena would be tested often. Clarityfiend 21:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)"
I think the constant testing solves the question. I think this should be mentioned in the article that she gets tested for steroids a lot and so she is not using them. SakotGrimshine 23:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, this is agreeable. Serena says this in an interview:
<<Serena was also asked how many times she had been drug tested in the last 12 months?
"I get tested every week for some reason. I wouldn't do any type of performance- enhancing drugs. I get tested all the time and they even come to my house. I guess it's good to have them because it brings a lot of integrity to tennis.">>
Here is your source [1] if you feel it is important to add in the article. But please don't add any speculation that she is a man, because she's not. Ô 00:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, what a ridiculous subject of talk that is more appropriate for the tabloids than Wikipedia. - rock8591
[edit] Official website
I just tried the external link to Serena's official website, and it doesn't work. I searched Google, and couldn't find anything. Does anyone know anything about this? Is there a new site which I'm just not finding? Tented 00:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
I just tried it, it worked fine for me using Opera ...--Billymac00 17:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Parity with Justine Henin's Wikipedia Page?
It seems a little odd to me that Serena's page has references to the controversies between them, yet the contrary is not permitted on Justine's page, despite references to video of the incidents and her coach's own comments. If we're going to permit this kind of POV, there should be parity on both pages. I suggest (1) not putting "controversy" as a section or (2) allowing "controversy" on both pages. Agrippina Minor 20:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] According to her website, she isn't playing in Moscow...
Her website says she is playing Stuttgart and Zurich. So I'm editing that - Sakya23 01:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mistake in the results table
According to the table of results, Serena won the French open 2003. This was not the case. She lost to Jutine Henin in the semi finals, this was the controversial hand event. However I cannot work out how to change it
Sakya23 14:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- What is your source? -- Donald Albury 03:35, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] SI template opinion
Should the following templates be on this page?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 03:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
- Definitely not. They would be a distraction. Her modeling for Sports Illustrated is already covered in the article with the appropriate emphasis. Tennis expert (talk) 03:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
