CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles

1994 tennis event results

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 26, 2023
Entity authorityQ3717734 ↗
Source-derived summary

Martina Navratilova was the defending champion, but lost in the third round to Ann Grossman.

Amy Frazier won the title by defeating Grossman 6–1, 6–3 in the final.

Seeds

The first eight seeds received a bye into the second round.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles” as 1994 tennis event results. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewMost valuable as an event-and-institution map that identifies actors, dates and record creators for deeper historical inquiry. The current 40-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Virginia, Slims and Angeles can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the history & society register because the source frames it as 1994 tennis event results. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 26, 2023. The linked authority identifier is Q3717734. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles primary sources, 1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles archive and Virginia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles”?
  2. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
  3. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “1994 Virginia Slims of Los Angeles – Singles” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.