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

2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles

2013 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 revisionJan 18, 2026
Entity authorityQ4629951 ↗
Source-derived summary

Björn Phau was the defending champion but decided not to participate.

Michał Przysiężny defeated Jan-Lennard Struff 4–6, 7–6(7–5), 7–6(7–5) in the final to win the title.

Editorial summary

“2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles” enters the record as 2013 tennis event results. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Trofeo, Faip and Perrel can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewMost valuable as an event-and-institution map that identifies actors, dates and record creators for deeper historical inquiry. The current 26-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 Trofeo, Faip and Perrel.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Trofeo, Faip and Perrel provides the most credible route into that argument.

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 Jan 18, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4629951. 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 “2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles primary sources, 2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles archive and Trofeo 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 “2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – Singles”?
  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 “2013 Trofeo Faip–Perrel – 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.