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

2016 Uruguay Open – Singles

2016 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 23, 2026
Entity authorityQ28448744 ↗
Source-derived summary

Guido Pella was the defending champion but chose not to defend his title.

Diego Schwartzman won the title after defeating Rogério Dutra Silva 6–4, 6–1 in the final.

Editorial summary

“2016 Uruguay Open – Singles” enters the record as 2016 tennis event results. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Uruguay, Singles and tennis 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 28-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 Uruguay, Singles and tennis.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“2016 Uruguay Open – Singles” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Uruguay, Singles and tennis 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 Jan 23, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q28448744. 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 “2016 Uruguay Open – Singles”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 2016 Uruguay Open – Singles primary sources, 2016 Uruguay Open – Singles archive and Uruguay 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 “2016 Uruguay Open – Singles”?
  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 “2016 Uruguay Open – 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.