Talk:1931 World Snooker Championship

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:1931 World Snooker Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 16:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Shall review MWright96 (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lead

• "defending champion Joe Davis and Tom Dennis, previously three-times runner-up." - how about three-times runner-up Tom Dennis.
• Wikilink the term frame for non-Snooker readers to the correct article
• "The highest break of the match was 72 by Davis." - think there's a word missing from this sentence
• Also, perhaps mention the frame Davis made the break of 72?

• All done. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Background

• "with Dennis finishing the runner-up in three of the first four years of the championship," - with Dennis runner-up
• "the exception being 1928." - who was runner-up in 1928?

• Both done. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Championship details

• Wikilink the term frames to the relevant article for the readers unfamiliar with snooker terminology only on the first mention
• "The match was played from Monday 27 April to Friday 1 May." - the names of the days aren't needed, I think
• "Dennis's own billiard hall." - which was owned by Dennis.
• "and increased his lead to 6–4 at the end of the day." - the first day.
• "On the second day, Davis won the afternoon session 3–2[11] and the evening session by the same margin to leave the match level at 10–10." - how about rewording this sentence so it reads: On the second day, Davis won each of the afternoon and evening sessions 3–2 to level the match at 10–10?
• ""but jumped the cue ball clean over that obstacle" to make his escape." - according to whom?
• "but Davis won all five in the evening to take a 21–19 lead." - all five frames
• The terms double and pocket can be wikilinked to the relevant articles
• " missing an attempted double into the middle pocket.[14][8]" - refs in numerical order please
• "Davis took the first in the evening by a score 75–43," - Davis took the first frame of the evening
• "Davis was presented with the "Championship Cup" by Dr. Tinsley Lindley," - per MOS:DOC, Lindley's title shouldn't be used
• "who also presented Dennis with the runner-up medal." - repetition of "presented"
• "Snooker historian Clive Everton has considered whether Davis may have allowed Dennis to win some frames in order to prolong the match and therefore increase the gate receipts, and concluded that it seems more likely that Dennis was playing better than Davis had expected, and that when Davis was 16–19 behind, "it was entirely credible, though, that Joe should react to danger by raising his game and imposing his more positive personality when he needed to." - This is a run-on sentence
• "Discussing his brother's early years of domination of the World Snooker Championship, Fred Davis wrote that "it was in nobody's financial interest for the match to be decided early" and that this is probably why there were few one-sided matches, but that as Joe Davis's ability was so far ahead of other players, "as soon as [Joe] started to apply himself fully, there could be only one winner." - another run-on sentence
• ""as soon as [Joe] started to apply himself fully, there could be only one winner. - the ending quotation marks are missing

• All addressed. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Am putting the review on hold to allow the nominator to address or query the points raised above MWright96 (talk) 17:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks for taking on the review, and for your constructive comments, MWright96. Let me know what else needs to be done. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @BennyOnTheLoose: Now promoting to GA class MWright96 (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)