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

2006 Movistar Open – Doubles

2006 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 revisionDec 27, 2024
Entity authorityQ3866701 ↗
Source-derived summary

David Ferrer and Santiago Ventura were the defending champions, but Ferrer did not participate this year. Ventura partnered with Flávio Saretta, losing in the first round.

José Acasuso and Sebastián Prieto won the title, defeating František Čermák and Leoš Friedl 7–6(7–2), 6–4 in the final.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “2006 Movistar Open – Doubles” as 2006 tennis event results. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Movistar, Doubles and tennis.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current 45-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 value is orientation rather than verdict, with Movistar, Doubles and tennis providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “2006 Movistar Open – Doubles”, the useful work is to connect “2006 tennis event results” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

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 Dec 27, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q3866701. 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 “2006 Movistar Open – Doubles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2006 Movistar Open – Doubles primary sources, 2006 Movistar Open – Doubles archive and Movistar 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 “2006 Movistar Open – 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 “2006 Movistar Open – 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.