Nina Pegova
Russian professional golfer
Nina Pegova (Russian: Нина Пегова, born 5 January 1994) is a Russian professional golfer who has played on the Ladies European Tour.
Career
Pegova won the Russian Open Amateur Championship three times and was runner-up in the Finnish Amateur and Hungarian Amateur Championships. She has also won the Russian Open Professional Championship.
Pegova turned professional in 2015 and joined the LET Access Series (LETAS). She lost a playoff to Linda Henriksson of Finland at the 2017 VP Bank Ladies Open in Switzerland. In 2018, she finished T7 at the Jabra Ladies Open, a dual-ranking event with the Ladies European Tour.
Pegova won her first LETAS title at the 2019 Ladies Finnish Open and finished ninth on the Order of Merit. In 2020, she played in her first LPGA Tour event, the Women's Australian Open at Royal Adelaide Golf Club, where she did not make the cut.
In 2021, Pegova was runner-up at the Czech Ladies Challenge, Golf Flanders LETAS Trophy and Santander Golf Tour Zaragoza, before winning the Flumserberg Ladies Open in Switzerland. She finished 3rd in the LETAS Order of Merit to earn Ladies European Tour membership for the 2022 season.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Nina Pegova” is russian professional golfer. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Nina, Pegova and Russian, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “russian professional golfer” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 15, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q108423243. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1994, 2015, 2017 and 2018.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. 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
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Nina Pegova”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Nina Pegova primary sources, Nina Pegova archive and Nina research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Nina Pegova”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Nina Pegova” 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.