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

1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles

1996 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 revisionOct 5, 2025
Entity authorityQ3737523 ↗
Source-derived summary

Meredith McGrath and Larisa Savchenko won in the final 3–6, 6–3, 6–2 against Lori McNeil and Helena Suková.

Seeds

Champion seeds are indicated in bold text while text in italics indicates the round in which those seeds were eliminated.

Editorial summary

“1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles” enters the record as 1996 tennis event results. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Faber, Grand and Prix can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current 39-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Faber, Grand and Prix.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Faber, Grand and Prix provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Contemporary correspondence, administrative files and participant testimony can test how later narratives organized the event or institution. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 5, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q3737523. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. 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 “1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles primary sources, 1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles archive and Faber 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 “1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “1996 Faber Grand Prix – Doubles” 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.