Talk:2001 Masters (snooker)

O'Brien made century in O'Brien/Williams match

cuetracker has Williams scoring a century in this match, 102 in frame 4. This is incorrect. The Sun for 8 February has an article "Fergal marks up win at last - Snooker" in which it says "... But O'Brien buried those bitter memories as he fired in breaks of 102, 99 and 88 on his way to a nail-biting 6-5 victory. O'Brien, who clinched victory with a 53 break in the decider ..." The Mirror says "He repeatedly outscored Williams including a century in frame three and 99 in the penultimate frame" The Times also refers to a 53 break in the final frame by O'Brien. Indeed it's clear there's a problem with cuetracker since the frame-by-frame score has O'Brien 6-3 up and then Williams winning the last 2 frames, which makes no sense. Embarrassingly it did said O'Brien until I changed it in 2015. Nigej (talk) 12:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:2001 Masters (snooker)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 10:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Happy to discuss or be challenged on any of my review comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio check: Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows 39.4%. I reviewed all matches over 4% and found no concerns - the matches are appropriately sourced direct quotes or very common phrases.

Images - no images used. Looks like there are no freely available images of the winner or of the event. Passed for images.

Infobox:

• The WPBSA is mentioned in the infobox and lead but their organisation of the event isn't sourced. Perhaps this could be added into the overview section? One source that verifies the info is the following article, which doesn't have a byline: "BBC throw weight behind WPBSA", Snooker Scene, publisher: Everton's News Agency, Location:Birmingham, March 2001, pages 3-4.
  • Added MWright96 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Lead: - looks fine.

Overview:

• I think the first sentence implies that there were 16 competitors in 1975, which wasn't the case. A reworking like in 2002 Masters (snooker) would be fine.
  • Redone MWright96 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Tournament Summary

• Round 2: "which was the largest crowd for a Masters game in 18 years" - in the source this has a qualification: "apart from finals"
• Round 2: O'Sullivan questioned whether he had the initiative to continue playing snooker". Source has O'Sullivan saying "I am not sure if I have the bottle..." which I think has a different meaning, more him questioning whether he had the necessary temperament, courage or nerve (rather than initiative).
• Quarter-finals: "You wouldn't want to be my family cat at the moment" is amusing but might be a bit obscure to readers who don't realise it's a joke about him wanting to vent his frustration. Removal is optional, just one to consider.
• Quarter-finals: "Security was increased by 50 per cent for the game" - suggest adding a word to show that this relates to staffing.
• Quarter-finals: "This lead to two people from the crowd of 1,649 being removed from the arena." How about something like "Two people from the crowd of 1,649 were removed from the arena by security staff."? It's not clear to me from the sources that it was the increased level of security led to the ejections; they might have happened even with fewer security staff.
• Semi-finals: "He was aware the latter was missing from a long-distance" would benefit from a slight rewording along the lines "..was missing long-distance pots"
• Semi-finals: "Hendry commented Hunter was better that day he but felt he could have won" - looks like the "he" bolded here is a stray.
• Semi-finals: "had he potted ​1⁄4 of the long-range shots he played" - "a quarter" would be better.
• Semi-finals: "Post-match O'Brien said:" needs a comma after "Post-match" the way that I read it.
• Final: "he won it twice more in 2002 and 2004." - comma after "more"?
  • All of the above points have been addressed MWright96 (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Main Draw - looks fine.

Qualifying

• Amend round headings to "Quarter-finals" and "Semi-finals" and "Final" (to match main draw headings)
  • Done MWright96 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
• Could add "Best of X frames" in the round headings.
  • Added MWright96 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
• Winning scores should be in bold.
  • Added MWright96 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Century breaks

• The Telegraph source requires a subscription so should be marked as such.
  • Added MWright96 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Passing this now, as I'm happy it meets GA standards. Great work, MWright96. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)