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

2011 French Open – Mixed 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 revisionFeb 28, 2026
Entity authorityQ264935 ↗
Source-derived summary

Katarina Srebotnik and Nenad Zimonjić were the defending champions but lost to Casey Dellacqua and Scott Lipsky in the final 7–6(8–6), 4–6, [10–7]. This was the only major championship won by either Dellacqua or Lipsky in their careers.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “2011 French Open – Mixed doubles” as 2011 tennis event results. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around French, Mixed and doubles.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current 38-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 French, Mixed and doubles providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “2011 French Open – Mixed doubles”, the useful work is to connect “2011 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 Feb 28, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q264935.

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 “2011 French Open – Mixed doubles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2011 French Open – Mixed doubles primary sources, 2011 French Open – Mixed doubles archive and French 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 French Open – Mixed doubles”?
  2. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
  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 “2011 French Open – Mixed 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.