Talk:John McEnroe

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

File:Sciences humaines.svg This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): PeytonHamby.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Article style

Too many headings, and too many paragraphs within those headings (freakin' every sentence gets it's own line).

Yea I know, its terrible isn't it. Seriously - I don't know how you cope. Would you like me to call the Samaritans for you? Jeez...if only I had as few things to worry about.

There may be more important things in life than writing good articles on Wiki - but if you are writing articles on Wiki then they should be laid out properly and read well - as that is the aim of Wikipedia - it's ludicrous to attempt to counter a criticism of writing by claiming that writing is not important to the greater success of society in the same way as curing AIDS is - it is a totally ludicrous conflation of aims.Duster (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

You cannot be serious. That's what he says.

Johnny is too good!

Reply to last two lines - talk pages are for discussion of problems with/ideas about the article - not a general forum for the subject.Duster (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

kids

"He has six children (three with O'Neal, two with Smyth, and one from Smyth's previous marriage to rock star Richard Hell). " Clearly this means he only has five children.

No... 3 + 2 + 1 = 6. Iolakana•T 12:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The question then is, did he legally adopt Smyth's child from the previous marriage or does he publically refer to the child as his? If not, depending on the state the divorces/marriages occured and/or he resides in he may legally only have 5 children. If so, then yes it should be stated as 6 children. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.132.156.26 (talk) 02:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

Shouldn't it be mentioned somewhere in this article that Tom Thacker form punk rock band GOB is one of McEnroe's sons? [The Spooky One] | ^{[t c r]} 04:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Picture

Is the pic in the box the best Wikipedia can do? I think this image could be heavily improved.

I agree, it sucks. Most pictures like this on Wikipedia are terrible at representing an overall image of the individual. Maybe more then just his face on a 45 degree angle. He looks like a goat. — Hucz (talk) 23:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

First endorssment deal

M. signed his first endorsement with Sergio Tacchini, not Nike. He mentions this in his "You can not be serious" book, and also Tacchini's logo is on his tennis shirt in all photos from this period (till 1985) Levg-en 18:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki links

Please also check the numbers 84 and 70. The fans claim that these numbers are 77 and 77. et:John McEnroe Avjoska 19:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

McEnreOne of the first endorsement deals in tennis

"McEnroe signed one of the first professional endorsement deals in tennis with Sergio Tacchini in 1978."

Hardly.

Borg with Fila
Connors with his own brand of clothes and shoes
Stan Smith with Adidas
Rod Laver with Adidas
Ilie Nastase with Adidas
Arthur Ashe with Head
Jack Kramer with Wilson
Fred Perry with, um, Fred Perry
Pretty much everybody with LaCoste at some point
Lots of others with their names on racquets
and on and on and on
Brooke Baldwin Reportera

As far as the business of plastering logos all over a tennis player goes, Borg was the real trailblazer. However, virtually every pro before and after Mc was paid to wear what ever clothes they had on their backs and swing what ever racquet was in their hand.

Arguably McEnroe's deal with Nike was significant because it set the pattern for Nike's building product lines and advertising around an athelete's literal and figurative "image" that culminated with Jordan. It's just silly to say that Mc's deal with Tacchini was some sort of landmark though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.185.1.100 (talk) 19:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

regarding his doubles grand slam titles: he won the 1989 US open with Mark Woodforde, NOT Todd Woodbridge.

I think the comment on his announcing understates the quality of his commentary--which is about as good as anything of its kind, any sport IMHO. A New Yorker article a few years ago provided more detail on his doubles play, which was apparently beyond compare as well. It had some quotes of his about how he sees the angles. Sculler71 18:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)sculler71

Mars Bar Commercial

John McEnroe has been appearing in this Mars bar commercial recently in Australia. It splices old footage of him with, I think Nadal.

But for the life of me I cannot understand what is supposed to be happening in that ad.

Someone should add it to the page, and then maybe explain it too, because I am SO lost on this one.

4-men invitational tournaments

Hi everybody (Feardes, Jeffreyneave and all others) !!!

1979: Montpellier (4-men invitational), Perth

1980: Bruxelles (Brussels) (4-men invitational)

1981: Rome (4-men invitational)

1982: Perth (invitational tournament)

1984: Sydney Challenge, Osaka

1985: Inglewood (4-men invitational)

1988: Inglewood (4-men invitational)

Have you got any details about those special events ? Finals dates, runner-ups, scores, surfaces ?

In advance thank you very much.

Carlo Colussi 12:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Carlo, here are some details I could find out quickly ==>

1979: Montpellier (4-men invitational), July 28-29, 1979 3rd place match: Connors - Nastase 4-6 6-1 6-3 Final: McEnroe - Vilas 4-6 6-1 6-3

1979 Perth, Oct 27-28, 1979 1st round: McEnroe - Vilas 6-2 6-4 Gerulaitis - Alexander 6-4 4-6 6-2 Final: McEnroe - Gerulaitis ??

1980: Bruxelles (Brussels) (4-men invitational), April 7-8, 1980 3rd place match: Nastase - Tanner 6-4 7-5 Final: McEnroe - Connors 6-1 7-5

1981: Rome (4-men invitational), April 8-9, 1981 1st round: McEnroe - A.Panatta 6-3 6-4 Lendl - G.Mayer 4-6 6-2 7-6 3rd place match: G.Mayer - A.Panatta 6-2 6-4 Final: McEnroe - Lendl 7-6 6-4

1982: Perth (invitational tournament), Nov 2-3, 1982 1st round: McEnroe - Gerulaitis 6-4 4-6 6-3 Borg - Lendl 6-4 1-6 6-3 3rd place match: Lendl - Gerulaitis 6-3 6-4 Final: McEnroe - Borg 6-1 6-4

1984: Sydney Challenge, Feb 15-18, 1984 Round Robin Group: McEnroe - Vilas 6-2 3-6 6-3 4-6 6-3 Lendl - Wilander 6-0 6-4 6-2 McEnroe - Wilander 6-1 6-2 6-1 Vilas - Lendl 2-6 6-0 7-6 6-0 McEnroe - Lendl 7-5 6-2 6-1 Wilander - Vilas 7-6 6-4 6-4 Final: McEnroe - Vilas 6-3 6-3 6-3

1984 Osaka, March 5-6, 1984 Final: McEnroe - Noah 7-6 0-6 6-3

1985: Inglewood (4-men invitational), April 15-16, 1985 Final: McEnroe - Lendl 6-4 7-6 3rd place match: Krickstein - Nastase 6-4 6-1

1988: Inglewood (4-men invitational), Nov 9-11, 1988 Final: McEnroe - Lendl 7-5 6-2 3rd place match: Chang - Agassi 6-3 6-3

Feardes (talk) 00:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• • • Thanks a lot Carlo Colussi (talk) 08:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.--Lucio Garcia (talk) 18:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Pop-culture

How does what team he supports come under that?

Unless I am missing something, I never knew supporting a team came under that 77.99.186.110 (talk) 11:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

colour coding in tables

the tables that list his achievements is colour coded but, as far as i can see, there is no explanation of what the colours mean. if there is then its not clearly identified. 90.211.79.18 Hypnoticmonkey (talk) 13:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

The amount of information in this article, that's not only biased, but hardly and barely even sourced (for the level of significance) is atrocious! — Hucz (talk) 23:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

"Level of significance"? Sounds like your neutrality concern is premised on your point of view of the importance of this person. Of course, I just tipped my hand that I have a POV on your neutrality concern! RevelationDirect (talk) 02:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm expecting this section to be expanded upon, and actual, specific examples of NPOV violations listed. Otherwise, I'll just keep removing the tag. The discussion above me in no way, shape, or form warrants a POV tag at the top of the article. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 22:59, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Before you engage in edit warring, have a look at WP:3RR. Tennis expert (talk) 23:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you being intentionally obtuse? Crotchety Old Man (talk) 23:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

The tag seems a bit harsh and unwarranted, especially since the original criticisms were vague and needlessly attacking to begin with. Some POV language in sentences and descriptors, but nothing compromising overall NPOV of the article. I've taken it off. AlonsornunezComments 14:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I've added Mr. Expert's tag back in, as it seems very warranted: The article's ratio of facts to citations is very low. Let's do some research people! AlonsornunezComments 23:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. In any case, the March 2009 fact tag is appropriate; there are hardly any sources. I have now added a few, but many of the McEnroe biographies are not availbale online, so I cannot provide sufficiently. Hope others can help.--HJensen, talk 13:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for wider input on discussion at WikiProject Tennis

There is a long, ongoing discussion at WP:Tennis about the tournament tables found in tennis articles on English-language Wikipedia (e.g., this type of table). The discussion is about whether the "official sponsored name" of a tournament - such as Pacific Life Open - or another tournament name without the sponsor - such as Indian Wells Masters - must be used in those articles. Please join the discussion here. Thanks. Tennis expert (talk) 09:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Splitting the article?

I was wondering whether, given McEnroe's enormous list of results, one should create a new article named John McEnroe career statistics, containing all his results? (A similar division is—successfully, imo—done with Billie Jean King and Billie Jean King career statistics.) This could help making the main article shorter, focused, sourced (and, in my opinion, foster an expansion in various relevant directions other than just his results and records). --HJensen, talk 13:04, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with this. The splitting will help to free up some room to expand in other direction for this very big article. It's helped with BJK. AlonsornunezComments 13:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree. This article is enormous compared to the importance of the person and not well-rounded, at all. Where'd the guy come from? HOw'd he get so good at tennis? We want to hear more about his personal life (it should be organized in one section and not mentioned as an aside after his retirement.) Put all the stats somewhere else.--69.108.136.114 (talk) 01:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

citation

I'm sorry, but I don't do this sort of thing often enough to remember how it's done, so I'm just going to point out that the citation number 26 in the article on Bjorn Borg ("ice-man or ice-Borg") will serve as well for the "citation needed" in the "Career" section of the McEnroe article, para 6, just before citation #4, where the article says, "This behavior was in sharp contrast to that of Borg, who was painted by the tabloid press as an unflappable "ice man."[citation needed]"

Maybe somebody who can remember how to fix things like that can put the citation in....

KyrCadet (talk) 23:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Confusing line

This sentence really doesn't make sense to me but I don't know enough about tennis to know what this is trying to say so I figured I'd leave this here:

"a style of play that faded in the 2000s with the advent of rackets that enhanced the return of serve above the serve and made approaches to the net following a serve problematic for all but the finest exponents of the craft." Ayzmo (talk) 12:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

You are correct so I fixed it. File:Yes check.svg Done. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Steroids

From the lede: " Later in life McEnroe admitted to unwittingly using steroids whilst playing tennis. He however denied claims that he used anabolic steroids during his comeback to the tour". Two problems: firstly it is unsourced, and as such per WP:BLP policy should be removed immediately - which I shall now do. Secondly, the lede is supposed to summarise the body of the text, so it doesn't belong there anyway. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Oops - it seems that it is sourced, after all. It still doesn't belong in the lede though. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:34, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

In light of that, do you think the doping categories are appropriate? I can't see why not if the claim about steroids is appropriately sourced. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 17:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I can't really see how this is a 'doping case' - it only came to light after McEnroe's career ended, and I'm not even sure that the use of the steroids used was banned at the time. Describing it as a 'doping case' seems to me to imply more than the sources state. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

1. From doping in sport it seems to me that serious discussion over the ethics of taking performance-enhancing drugs dates back for over one hundred years.
2. I don't agree that McEnroe's used of performance enhancing drugs going undetected during his career implies this issue is not worth mentioning -- couldn't this just as easily be characterized as McEnroe being an instance of an athlete who got away with it. That his use wasn't detected does not mean he didn't benefit from it.
3. The passage you have excised, multiple times, does not use the terms "doping", or "doping case".
4. As for the related categories -- I believe his inclusion is consistent with how these categories is used.
5. McEnroe has asserted that the steroids were "the legal kind"; he also asserted that they were the kind given to horses, and that he later learned the drugs were no longer given to horses because they were too strong. We cover what RS say. I don't think we should stop looking for coverage of his performance-enhancing drug use -- just because he asserts his drug use was legal. He is hardly an unbiased source for this interpretation, is he?

Here are some other references to his drug use. His ex-wife asserts he started to use steroids in 1988, and that steroid use affected his mood and made him blame her and their children for his losses. In 2002, two years prior to admitting steroid use, he belittled his ex-wife's assertions he used steroids. Geo Swan (talk) 03:40, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I was going to block the IP for persisting with edit warfare, but Rklawton beat me to it. If he shows up as a different address let me know and I'll semi-protect. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 15:48, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

As a courtesy to other contributors could we please discuss controversial edits on the talk page, not in the edit summaries?

In this edit an IP contributor reverted a passage about McEnroe admitting to using steroids, with the edit summary "I don't condone him unwittingly using steroids of the legal kind, but other top players are likely to have done the same. They were not anabolic steroids. It's already in the main body of the text. It doesn't IMO need to be highlighted in the lead section".

Making controversial edits, that are explained solely in the edit summary is a very bad practice, as it represents a great temptation for readers who disagree to respond with an edit summary of their own -- and the easiest way to do that is to revert them. Not only does this bad practice trigger edit-warring, but it is very hard to really read later. One basically needs to have three tabs open (1) one for the contribution history, so one can see all the edit summaries at once, one for the talk page, one for the talk page, and one to slowly step through the diffs, one at a time, as most of these edit summary explanations can't be fully understood without looking at the corresponding edit. Later readers should be able to count on finding the full explanation for controversial edits on the article's talk page, and shouldn't have to look at the contribution history to read the edit summaries at the same time.

I had previously restored this passage, adding a reference to his steroid use, from later in the article. The contributor who excised it yesterday apparently did so because he did not recognize that a reference to the steroid use was already in the article. So I do not regard mine as a controversial edit. On second thought maybe that wasn't as clear as I thought.

So, does McEnroe's steroid use belong in the lead? Yeah, I think so. I don't really follow Sports, I don't know who won the superbowl, world series, Olympics, but I do notice when atheletes own up to, or are caught, using steroids. In McEnroe's case he seems to have confessed to this steroid use, so I don't believe this is a BLP issue. Geo Swan (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't see why it belongs in the lede. It wasn't of significance to his career, and his statement regarding steroid use doesn't read like a 'confession' to me. Rather, he states that he used the substance for medical reasons. As I wrote above, I'm not even sure that the use of such steroids was banned at the time. To justify including this in the lede, I think we'd need to demonstrate that the issue was seen as of lasting significance. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Analyst for CBS Sports US Open Coverage

I think this article should mention his role as an analyst for CBS Sports' coverage of the US Open. He's been doing that since 1995.

http://www.cbssports.com/cbssports/team/jmcenroe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.156.37 (talk) 06:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Greatest Doubles player of all time = Totally Larfable!

The clown comment of news reporter, Rubinstein, deserved the 'backyard spelling' given the heading! ;) ... being about as similarly intellectually informed! Just for openers, many of the famed Aussies of the 1950's and 1960's would simply leave Mac out the back in doubles! Immediately, I think of Roy Emerson, for instance, who won 16 doubles Grand slams and led many Australian Davis Cup victories for the Australians in doubles rubbers - one whom, among many former players, is regarded the greatest of all doubles players. I also think of players like John Bromwich, whom many others would hail the greatest doubles player of all. Then there is the impeccable record of Rod Laver - both as doubles and singles exponent, who was only limited in doubles opportunities by his years playing the singles professional circuit at the time. The Australians basically had a mortgage on great doubles play for many long years. I think Rubinstein's way out comment should have simply been left out of the article's text altogether, being totally unrepresentative of any reality: perhaps the guy would have been better following his namesakes, and sticking to commentary on 'classical music'!121.214.29.184 (talk) 11:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

"If" this had been the only source for the sentence in question I could agree. But I instantly found more sources and added two of them. One from the tennis hall of fame and another from the book "Epic." I changed the wording a bit. If those other players also have multiple quotes from sources such as these by all means add them to their own bios. On a quick check I found Sports Illustrated saying Todd Woodbridge may be the greatest of all time. The USTA has a faq saying Emerson was the greatest of all time. But the Chicago Tribune has McEnroe as possibly the greatest. It's all pretty subjective, which is why we add sourcing. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:06, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

The Aussies were great doubles players, especially Johnny Mac's hero Laver. But you have to admit, after Laver there are not too many players who were tops in singles and doubles which I think this is why most folks praise McEnroe. In fact, I think that most people think McEnroe is the greatest in the Open era which is far different sphere that those fine gentlemen played in. And don't forget that when the Aussies played, the most of the time they only had to play one tie for the Cup whereas McEnroe had to play at least four ties (in singles & doubles) to win a cup. But, hey, I am biased! Thanks!! Raul17 (talk) 23:46, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

Template:Substituted comment Substituted at 20:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John McEnroe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120605022801/http://www.tennischannel.com/goat/71.aspx to http://www.tennischannel.com/goat/71.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110913191148/http://www.usopen.org/pdf/Record_Book_Most_Championship_Titles.pdf to http://www.usopen.org/pdf/Record_Book_Most_Championship_Titles.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011200320/http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/about/history/john_mcenroe.html to http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/about/history/john_mcenroe.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100708061728/http://www.espnmediazone3.com/us/2009/11/mcenroe_john/ to http://www.espnmediazone3.com/us/2009/11/mcenroe_john/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Art gallery

I was interested in John McEnroe developing interest in art and his opening an appointment-only art gallery. Could that get a sentence somewhere, since this is a biographical article? MaynardClark (talk) 14:14, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Serena Williams in men's circuit

McEnroe said,"if she [Williams] played the men’s circuit she’d be like 700 in the world." [1] The coverage has been in multiple sources. Even Rush Limbaugh covered this [2]. Please include it in the article.--2601:C4:C001:289E:11D2:9FE1:C4A9:2D54 (talk) 06:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Disagree. It's probably just a momentary mini-controversy that won't amount to much. If it has serious reprocusions, like him let go from his broadcasting job then there'd be ample reason to mention it. -Testpored (talk) 01:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John McEnroe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1009/top.ten.tennis/content.1.html
• Added Template:Tlx tag to http://www.atpworldtour.com/tennis/5/en/players/playerprofiles/default.asp?playernumber=M047
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029220802/http://www.tennisfame.com/hall-of-famers/john-mcenroe to http://www.tennisfame.com/hall-of-famers/john-mcenroe

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Kojaque song

Not sure why this was removed. If Kojaque is noteworthy enough to have a wiki page about him is his song not worth a mention, like the German group. Can add a better source if wanted, but Nialler9 is a well known Irish mag about music. 78.19.9.83 (talk) 22:34, 15 November 2023 (UTC)