july utc did it ever occur to you that what you are doing is imaginary there was no concept of a grand slam when wimbledon started in or when the us open started in or when the australian open started in it was not until the s that the idea of the grand slam emerged what you are doing is an ahistorical revision of the past ok many persons do that it's called hindsight some have an issue with counting slams before the challenge round was abolished others have a problem with pre open era counts because they excluded professionals as there is no consensus and wikipedia calls for pluralism the article reflecting multiple major points of view it would not be too much to come up with a solution that would list most slams open era and most slams pre open era so why is it too difficult for you to accept the idea of at the very least listing the pre french open winners all your excuses are cop outs too much work others don't agree with you so you want to mess up the board maybe if you stepped back and asked why were others adding the greyed out cases to the slam counts you might find your answer when i open the encyclopedia britannica a british reference they list all the winners of the french open back to when i open the world almanac an american reference they list suzanne lenglen as having won titles so what makes you more authoritative than those sources clearly you have not edited in a spirit of compromise and have instead wp owned these articles but history is not on your side by the way i have a degree in history what about you