Talk:Sania Mirza

Writing Style?

It seems to me that certain sections of this article - especially "Social Causes, "Media Criticism", and "Controversy" - are written in more journalistic than encyclopedic style - eg. "in-your-face no-holds-barred attitude with a penchant for t-shirts with strong punchlines", "something political bigwigs have been fast to exploit" - I mean, it's a good writing style for a newspaper or magazine article, but not Wikipedia. Suggestions? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.237.137.30 (talk) 03:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

Times magazine?

Which Times magazine was she featured on? NYT or the Times? If this isn't clarified and verified, then the fact (?) should be removed. --Gurubrahma 16:20, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Here's a pic of the Time Magazine cover Sania on Time Cover

Wardrobe??

Why is there a subtopic on wardrobe in the biographical entry of a sportswoman?? I strongly believe that this topic should be deleted ASAP. Aabha R 21:23, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Just as one would treat Serena Williams and Anna Kournikova as people with interests in fashion design and modelling respectively, Sania Mirza's interests in her wardrobe need a mention. All the more so since her wardrobe has drawn the ire of muslim clerics, leading to issue of fatwas. On a more metaphysical level, I think Sania Mirza represents the growing pangs of youth in India - steeped in tradition (for example, as a conservative Muslim she offers namaz five times a day), yet experiencing modernity (for example, through her wardrobe). Of course, people had problems in mentioning even the fact that she is a muslim. The point is no sportsperson exists in a vacuum - their interests & beliefs (and their lifestyles as a proxy to these) should get reflected. I guess that is the reason why the article on Gary Kasparov talks of his political ambitions and the article on Martina Navratilova talks of her same-sex relationships. --Gurubrahma 04:56, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Your arguments are wellplaced. I don't agree with how the media in India often presents this aspect of Sania's personality, giving it more importance and coverage than even her performance on the court, and I thought that you were just taking on from there. Anyways, now that you've presented your views, I don't have a problem with it. Just a little thing, maybe you could focus a little more on the issue, or the controversy, whatever you call it, and maybe a little less on the slogans on her shirts themselves. Just a suggestion, its upto your discretion! Aabha R 16:24, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Perfect! Some sensible debate and discussion! I have taken the spirit of your comments and carried out a light edit. Let's keep adding to the discussion and to the article. Autumnleaf 23:06, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I am struggling to keep in the article the stuff about .. her T-shirts????! Autumnleaf 16:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I appreciate your edits in cutting the trite but for the excising of the last line about her exasperation. An article about a person should also capture the times and the moods, yet appear encyclopedic. References to her wardrobe and the media attention also capture, in some way, how India is starving for young role models. Her exasperation with the press captures, imo, the opinion of youth icons in India to do what they want to do with out the press snooping around. If we can have articles such as You forgot Poland, we can definitely have a few lines abt her t-shirts, right?? --Gurubrahma 17:17, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I take your point! I have tried to edit the lines to put it in the context you allude to! Autumnleaf 22:06, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Salwar or Shalwar and Kameez or Qamis

We have a convention on Wikipedia where we use British English for articles pertaining to the British context and American English for articles pertaining to the American context. Similarly, we should be using Salwar here since that is the spelling widely used in India. Shalwar is used in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Also, Google hits for "Salwar Kameez" are 7,00,000+ while hits for "Shalwar Qamis" are 139. --Gurubrahma 06:07, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that's sensible. Is there a particular reason that the words need to be first-letter capitalized? -Rholton 13:20, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

No particular reason per se, apart from the fact that Salwar and Kameez are actually two different words and that Salwar can be worn without Kameez and Kameez can be worn without salwar (though it is rare to see that happening these days). "Salwar kameez" and "salwar kameez" should also be fine as long as one type of capitalization is used consistently in the article. Thanks for bringing this up Rholton. --Gurubrahma 15:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Partial reversion of anon edits

There is no reference added to it though it says HT-Sept. 8th. Also, Sania was supposed to have talked of the prevalence of sex before marriage (this is different from safe sex per se) but she denied making those statements the next day. The title of the section is POV and hence I changed it. The reference given for her refusing to play with Shahar Peer is also given as HT-Sept. 8th. This cannot be correct because the WTA Banagalore open event itself happened (still happening) in February 2006. --Gurubrahma 13:06, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Inclusion of Israelin Players:

Why are Israeli players included in the list of top Asian players? The Israeli football team competes in the European Groups. Also, Israel does not participate in the Asian Games. Just wondering thats all.

• Can someone explain this: "Many point that her handling of the dress-fatwa issue and also her refusal to pair up with an Israeli player have contributed to her stance being non-confrontal, something political bigwigs have been fast to exploit. ... 2005 Japan Open: reaches the semi-finals of women's singles and doubles (partnering Shahar Peer of Israel); reaches her highest doubles ranking of 114." What does it mean to say that she refused to pair up with an Israeli player, then two paragraphs later talk about how she did pair up with the Israeli player Shahar Peer? --Metropolitan90 05:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Religion??

Is it neccessary in the introduction to mention her religion. I have never seen anybody giving their introduction by their religion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.39.121.226 (talk • contribs)

It becomes important in the context of fatwa and the controversy over her wardrobe. The fact that she is a Muslim is not mentioned in the intro, but only in the first section. --Gurubrahma 06:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

refmt?

Under the garb of refmt, lot of valid info seems to have been deleted - for example, her victories over 2 top ten players, Nadia Petrova and Svetlana Kuznetsova. The third in the list is Martina Hingis. [1] I'll come back to refmt/revert/reorganise the article some time later. --Gurubrahma 13:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Awards

I just added a seperate section by name awards. I have tried to link the article as citation..but looks like I messed up with the HTML code. Can somebody pls correct it? The refernce number is not appearing in accordance with the order.

Photo

The infobox photo is currently , but other photos like and are also available at wikimedia commons. They each have their advantages, e.g. the latter is frontal instead of sideways, but she's sticking her tongue out. Any preferences which one to use? I like the second over the current one. I guess I like the third even better as an infobox picture. Gidi70 01:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I added the other photos as well and made the third one mentioned above the infobox picture. No pictures were deleted, just moved. I also added the {{commons}} template, so you can find more photos there. I don't think we need more pictures on the page until we have more text to go next to it; I know she's very good looking, but too much of a good thing is never good... Maybe we can replace some of the photos with even better ones. Gidi70 18:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I like the third one the best. It's a better view of her face than some of the side angles and she looks good in that one. Sure, she's sticking out her tongue, but I don't think Wikipedia should favor bland photos over interesting ones. --JamesAM 02:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Muslim?

Is she a Muslim? See, there are so many Muslim groups criticising her for going against the Islamic dress code. Furthermore Uncyclopedia has the article about her which mentions that her religion is Islam. lastest version Yeah, I know Uncyclopedia is just a joking site, but many of the jokes are actually based on facts. --אדמוןד ואודס_{自分の投稿記録} 05:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused, could you elaborate your argument? LeaveSleaves (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

1. "See, there are so many Muslim groups criticising her for going against the Islamic dress code" - if she is not a Muslim, there is no reason for the Muslim groups to criticise what she wears. These conservative Muslims only criticise another Muslim for misobeying the Quranic teaching.
2. "Furthermore Uncyclopedia..." - Usually articles in Uncyclopedia make jokes based on the relevant fact. The Uncyclopedia article about her mentions that her religion is Islam. --אדמוןד ואודס_{自分の投稿記録} 20:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

She in fact is a Muslim and that's the reason why there has been so much criticism about her dress and decorum by Islamic groups. LeaveSleaves (talk) 21:56, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks, but is there anywhere in the article mentions that she's a Muslim? --אדמוןד ואודס_{自分の投稿記録} 06:20, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Since it was very obvious to me, I never noticed it. It's good that you rectified it. LeaveSleaves (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

age

she should be 22 now.