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

2011 Challenge Bell – Doubles

2011 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 11, 2025
Entity authorityQ3637687 ↗
Source-derived summary

Sofia Arvidsson and Johanna Larsson were the defending champions, but Larsson decided not to participate this year. Arvidsson partnered with Marina Erakovic, but lost in the first round to Jamie Hampton and Anna Tatishvili.

Raquel Kops-Jones and Abigail Spears won the title, defeating Hampton and Tatishvili 6–1, 3–6, [10–6] in the final.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “2011 Challenge Bell – Doubles” as 2011 tennis event results. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current 52-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 Challenge, Bell and Doubles can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the history & society register because the source frames it as 2011 tennis event results. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 11, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q3637687. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Official terminology may obscure informal participation, dissent or communities documented only indirectly. 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 “2011 Challenge Bell – Doubles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2011 Challenge Bell – Doubles primary sources, 2011 Challenge Bell – Doubles archive and Challenge 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 “2011 Challenge Bell – Doubles”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  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 “2011 Challenge Bell – 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.