Wikipedia

Talk:2019–20 snooker season

(Redirected from Talk:Snooker season 2019/2020)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by L235 in topic GA Review
Learn more about this page
Good article2019–20 snooker season has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star2019–20 snooker season is the main article in the 2019–20 snooker season series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 5, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed
September 8, 2021Good article nomineeListed
October 13, 2022Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Date format in Calendar tables

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can I get some input on the date format used in the Calendar table in this article (and the articles for previous seasons). I note there is a footnote next to the header in the Date column, defining the choice of date style, however this in contravention of Wikipedia guidelines on date formats. MOS:DATESNO specifically outlines the date format used in these articles as unacceptable, and provides examples of acceptable alternatives (particularly for use in tables/abbreviated format). Taken in conjunction with guidance at WP:DATEOVER, I would suggest that e.g. "9 May" would be the most appropriate format for these tables. The current format is ambiguous (as demonstrated by the need for a footnote) and the Wikipedia guidelines exist to prevent this ambiguity. Mato (talk) 19:35, 25 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

Prize Money Indian Open

edit
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Will there be an Indian Open and if no, why is it listed in the prize money list?--BigPig (talk) 17:08, 14 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Dates for Seniors Tour events

edit

Some events on the Seniors tour have moved to different dates. I recently edited these on the calendar to new dates, but I see they were changed back to the old, incorrect dates. Why? Seniors Irish Masters, from January to March: https://seniorsnooker.com/2019/07/18/rokit-seniors-irish-masters-2020-new-dates/

Seniors Masters to May: https://www.alexandrapalace.com/whats-on/rokit-phones-com-world-seniors-masters-snooker/

Color coding of the Seniors 6-Red World Championship

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago25 comments6 people in discussion

The tournament is a variant event belonging to the World Seniors Tour. So which color code to chose for it? This is of course a matter of opinion, and I guess it should be resolved through consensus. My opinion is, that all the WST events should have the same color, in order to provide an overview of the tournaments on that tour. Otherwise the color coding kind of loses its meaning. I'm sure a case can be made for the opposite conclusion. This is just my opinion. (An alternative solution could be the color yellow for the event, and then the color for VE in the cell with the name of the tournament. Though this might look a bit odd.) Mrloop (talk) 11:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

I think the colours have a few issues, with WP:ACCESS and them currently being used for non-defining categories. Realistically, if we keep the colours, the Seniors Tour should take precedence. As should the ranking event on the snooker-shoot out. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
Exactly. Mrloop (talk) 19:24, 22 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Exactly what. it is a 6red event exactly like the other six red event which is a varient.

-The other six-red event is a variant event to the main tour. A variant event on the Seniors tour, should still primarily be shown as a Seniors event, or using a mix of the two highlight colours to show it's both a Seniors event and a variant event.


you missing the point they are both variant events and should be colour coded the same. you cant just say stick it in yellow because it's seniors.it is a seniors variant event.someone may add it in error as a non-ranking event as it would not stand out as a variant if it is yellow.

-It can be highlighted as both yellow and variant (two colours used), but you didn't like that, and you vandalised the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 07:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

IP user - please sign your posts with ~~~~. It's hardly vandalism. I don't really see why we seperate out variant events on here at all really. It being a variant only effects the rules, not how the tour works. I think we'd be better to remove the colours entirely than to use two for one field. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
Agree with Lee, colour coding the variant events just causes confusion. There is only one other VE in the list anyway. Remove VE colour altogether, then the Seniors 6-reds will just be yellow like the other Seniors events. You really should be conducting your disagreement here and not via edit summaries and repeated edit warring so please stop. Rodney Baggins (talk) 11:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
To be fair, to make a change like that, as it would be unilaterally used for previous articles, it would probably be best to get some more input at WP:SNOOKER/WP:CUE. I agree though, I'm not sure why we ever gave it additional colours. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
I would argue that if anything, the WR events should be coloured as they are "more important" than the NR events. Then NR, VE, TE (at the very least) should not be coloured at all. And yes any changes to the colour coding would have to be retrospectively applied to the historical articles too. Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:28, 23 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

-The new colour scheme layout (as of 1st December 2019) looks horrible and is not in conformity with past seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 22:49, 1 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk)

The colour scheme in which the seniors events stand out like yellow beacons is completely stupid in my view. The eye is drawn to these, giving the impression that these are the most important events when actually they are the least important. It would make more sense to have the ranking events as yellow beacons. Nigej (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

The Seniors events don't have to be yellow beacons, but I believe the ranking events should not be highlighted as these are the "normal" events of the season, and the majority of the season are ranking events, so should just be plain white. Highlighting the majority item on a list seems pretty silly to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 21:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps we should have two tables: one for the important events and one for the mickey mouse events like the seniors. Nigej (talk) 21:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I've thought about that as well. Seems like a good idea. Mrloop (talk) 21:15, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

i agree with 86.42.85.52 leave the colours as they are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.176.27 (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

"Edit warring"

edit

I took the issue of the colors in the calendar to the talk page. There seems to be a consensus – amongst the very few people caring about the page.. – that the calendar needed fewer colors. I then made a new color scheme and in the process gave the main tour ranking tournaments a color instead of having them in white. Also per suggestion here on the talk page. The precise decisions on preferred colors is not that important, I think. But there are too many colors ind the calendar, and some of them are even conflicting. Someone without even having a wiki profile keeps working against the consensus. You can call it edit warring all you want, but when the issue has been resolved on the talk page, it seems like vandalizing to keep changing it. Mrloop (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

It is a terrible mish-mash, the yellow beacons being the worst aspect. Compare with Snooker season 1999/2000, three neutral colours. Nigej (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
I take it that you agree then, that the calendar needs fewer colors. But I might, of course, be wrong in my assessment. Mrloop (talk) 21:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
There was no consensus, Mrloop. I, not having a wiki profile has nothing to do with your argument. Clearly, there was no consensus, hence this debate. Separate tables defeats the propose of a CALENDAR list, which is suppose to list events as they happen in the season. Again, any changes would have to be made also to ALL previous seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
Certainly true. I still quite like the idea of two (or more) tables. One with the important events: ranking events, Masters, Champion of Champions, plus probably Shanghai Masters and Paul Hunter Classic and perhaps the Championship League, and one (perhaps more) table(s) for the rest. Nigej (talk) 22:09, 2 December 2019 (UTC)Reply


Nigej everybody is happy with the snooker colour coding apart from mrloop.leave them alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.176.27 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure who this "everyone" is of who you speak, but it's a disaster currently. I agree with Nigej, that it would be better to put this into different tables for different tours.
Currently we have a weird mis-match in that we have no amateur events on the calendar at all. I suggest one for ranking events, one for non-ranking, one for seniors, and one for amateur/women's. This gets rid of the colours entirely Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
It's a Snooker SEASON calendar, not a Snooker TOUR(S) calendar. One calendar, to list all the events. And there are amateur events already on the calendar, what do you think the challenge tour is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
There was no consensus, Mrloop. I, not having a wiki profile has nothing to do with your argument. Clearly, there was no consensus, hence this debate. Separate tables defeats the propose of a CALENDAR list, which is suppose to list events as they happen in the season. Again, any changes would have to be made also to ALL previous seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Seems to me that we have one person wanting the multi colour/yellow beacon style and everyone else thinks it's terrible. BTW: Lee Vilenski is not the same person as MrLoop. Nigej (talk) 08:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
I know Lee Vilenski is not MrLoop. BTW: 89.204.176.27 is not the same person as 86.42.85.52, so there's more than one person disagreeing here. Once AGAIN, the Seniors events don't have to be "yellow beacon", I'm not simply arguing for the "yellow beacon" colour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk)
I'm no expert on IP addresses but it's a bit strange to me that all the supporters of the multi-colour/yellow beacon style are IP users having IP addresses from Ireland. Nigej (talk) 09:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
I'm no expert on IP addresses either, but two Snooker fans editing Wikipedia articles from a country of over six million people is not really strange. 86.42.85.52 is me, and my stance is not simply pro-"yellow beacon". I'm against highlighting World Ranking events, and/or having multiple calendar lists for all the tours.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 09:46, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
However, see WP:MEATPUPPET: "In votes or vote-like discussions, new users may be disregarded or given significantly less weight, especially if there are many of them expressing the same opinion." and "For the purpose of dispute resolution when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets." Nigej (talk) 12:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
I'm on mobile now, so I know it will take too long to do, but is probably worth checking at WP:SPI. We really shouldn't be promoting professional snooker as the only events that exist, otherwise we should change the titles of these to "professional snooker season...". The colours currently have some WP:ACCESS issues, and having multiple colours for one event is a severe case of cruft. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

In summary: The general view is that there is there is no point in having the VE category. The one dissenter is an IP user (or group of related IP users - who would still only count as one vote). The VE category seems to have been first used in the 2008/09 season so there would be 11 seasons to change. The 2008/09 article did not have the VE category until 7 November 2017‎ when it was added by an IP user. Nigej (talk) 08:43, 16 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Calendar section

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

My proposal for the "Calendar" section is that there should be three tables:

1. A table for events which the main tour players play in. The current table is already headed "The following table outlines the dates and results for all the ranking and major invitational events." so I think this reflects what this table was originally meant to be. 2. A table for the Challenge Tour 2019/2020. Actually there is already a perfectly good table there, so this is perhaps unnecessary, a link would be enough. 3. A table for the Seniors events.

A further table could be added later for other important "amateur" events like the IBSF World Snooker Championship. I would further propose that the Challenge Tour and Seniors tables do not have any colour coding. The tables will be quite short and colour coding will not be needed. Nigej (talk) 07:22, 4 December 2019 (UTC) (User 86.42.85.52 has now changed the heading I quoted above, but what I wrote was correct at the time Nigej (talk) 08:24, 4 December 2019 (UTC))Reply

Strongly disagree with this change. The calendar is supposed to be a comprehensive list of the entire Snooker season, not separate calendars for the pro tour, amateur events, and Seniors tour, etc. Separate tables defeats the purpose of an inclusive CALENDAR. Again, like other changes, this multiple tables idea would also have to be applied to previous seasons for overall conformity. This change is not needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
I like this idea. We have too many items to just have a list like this. Historically there has only been few recognised tournaments, and we have been begging out for a 2019 in Snooker in a WP:SPLIT article for ages (see 2019 in sports for the reasons. The fact that we completely ignore events like the 2019 Women's World Snooker Championship is the worst kind of prejudice. I would one day be interested in promoting this to GA/FL but without this change, we'd fail on WP:BROAD and ACCESS reasons. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
We could just add women's Snooker events to the calendar? How active are they going to be? The Challenge Tour event pages are not created/full results/etc., for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 12:58, 4 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 3 January 2020

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago11 comments11 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to format "1968–69 snooker season".(non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2020 (UTC)Reply


– As per conversation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2020/March#Snooker season article moves, I can't see a reason for the dates to be at the end of the titles, as they are always piped when being cited. I propose the move of all of these such articles to be more consistent, and usable as base links. As it is over 50 pages, I've done a formal RM. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

2019–20 snooker season?

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

IP 86.42.85.52 keeps trying to put "snooker season" in caps in opening sentence of lead. He/she started a new Talk page section earlier today saying Why isn't it "2019–20 Snooker Season" with capitalized words, like many other sport season wiki pages? Like, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_EFL_League_One, for example? but then deleted the question and just proceeded to start an edit war on the main page instead. Huh? Nigej has been valiantly trying to explain via edit summaries why caps are not needed. To reiterate, "snooker season" in this context is just a generic term for a period of time over which snooker matches are played and cannot be seen as a proper noun as it does not refer to a specific tournament or event. Apart from anything else, if "snooker season" were meant to be in caps, then the article title would be in caps and surely that would have been picked up in the recent move discussion!! IP is simply editing the bold reiteration in the first sentence which should clearly match the article title... Note to IP 86.42.85.52: if you were to register as a proper Wiki editor, then we could address you directly and have proper grown-up conversations about these things. Presumably the example you have given, 2019–20 EFL League One, is refering to the "2019–20 EFL League One football season" to give it its full name, where the "football season" would not be in caps for the same reason that "snooker season" does not need to be in caps here. To make a direct comparison, our full title might be "2019–20 World Snooker Tour snooker season". All the best. Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, that's the thing, it's not a proper noun. I would suggest it's just the IP being confused. If it escalates, then we can deal with RPP. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:47, 15 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
I've put in for a WP:RFP. Nigej (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Opening line?

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The opening line of the article states, "The 2019–20 snooker season is a series of professional snooker tournaments being played between 9 May 2019 and 4 May 2020.", but then the calendar lists senior and amateur events, some that end after "4 May 2020". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Clearly the dates needs changing. The issue with the word "professional" is more complex. In snooker circles, there seems to be a bizarre use of the term "professional" to mean the main tour when clearly events like the challenge and senior tours are "professional" in the normal sense of the word (ie there is significant prize money, see Professional sports). Somehow we need to clarify which use of the word we are talking about since we will have many readers unaware of the strange snooker usage of the word. Probably best to avoid using professional/amateur. Nigej (talk) 08:35, 16 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
the solution is no colours, and for the items to be split into thier corresponding articles... Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Bright yellow for seniors events

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As ever we have an edit war with seemingly just one IP editor wanting the bright yellow beacon style for seniors events. Is there a solution or are we going to give up? Nigej (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Seniors events at the end of the season

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Seniors Irish Masters that was due to played at the end of March, has moved to July 31-August 1 2020, because of the coronavirus.[1] I've moved the event to the bottom of the calendar, after the Seniors Masters in May and the Seniors 6 Red World Championship in June. But maybe the July/August event would now be considered part of next season, 2020-21? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ https://seniorsnooker.com/2020/03/09/the-wss-rokit-phones-com-2020-irish-masters-is-postponed/

2020 China Open: postponed or cancelled?

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article says it was cancelled, but there are no references. I have not found any source for that assertion, just that it was postponed indefinitely. I have seen the word "cancelled" used in this context when describing the 2020 China Open, but only regarding what had been scheduled. 73.81.116.35 (talk) 00:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Starting paragraphs

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I feel like the starting paragraphs highlighting what has happened in the season needs to be rewritten in a way that it only includes important details of the season, like records, important changes and crucial events; now it looks like a long list of things that has happened to the season (for example, I think first time ranking event winners should not be included as highlights). Alternatively, we can also delete the "results" paragraph, or wait until the World Snooker Awards has been held and then write such a paragraph to conform to the consistency of the snooker season pages of past seasons. --Ui56k (talk) 13:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure I understand the proposal. The WP:LEDE is a summary of a subject. I'm not sure how deleting information to wait for snooker awards is particularly suitable. We are still during the season, having some information is better than no information. We really should have a "season summary" section detailing the results, news and such but I've been putting off writing it. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago54 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2019–20 snooker season/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 23:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply


Hello! Thought I review this since it's shorter than your other nominations LOL! By the way, there's a duplicate GAN nomination on the talk page (June 22 + July 1). If you have any questions/comments, please let me know :)

Lead/infobox

edit

To review last

Players

edit

Out of date (Verification)

edit
  • I notice that this section is out of date. The January 2019 World Snooker Tour source is missing information that can be found from this June 2019 WPBSA source. Specifically:
    • "Three players came from the Challenge Tour" - WST said 2 but WPSBA does confirm 3.
    • "sixteen places were available through the Q School events" - WST only has 12, but WPSBA shows all 16.
    • "The six remaining places were given to continental championship winners" - This is off in several ways. It was five continental champions, and two invitations per WPBSA, making it seven remaining places.
      • It was actually four, not five.
    • "Amine Amiri won the African Billiards & Snooker Confederation's nomination" - true. Specifically, it happened after he won the African Championship, which is stated at "Morocco's Amine Handed Tour Card". I think it can be combined with the International champions section as both WST and WPBSA state the African championship winner would receive a card.
    • James Wattana also received an invitational per WPBSA.

Prose issues (P1)

edit
  • "consisted of a standard field of 128 professional players" - Original Research as it suggests 128 is a consistent number of players per season (I assume it is). However, if you're only describing and citing the 2019/20 season, then "standard" will need to be dropped.
  • "on the one-year ranking list, but who did not automatically qualify after the previous tour." - the bolded part sounds a bit off grammatically. How about "but had not already qualified after the previous tour"?
  • The two instances of "automatically qualify" I'm not 100% sure about (top 64 and 8 from the one -year list). Yes, they qualified but WST isn't obvious that they would automatically qualify. I suggest dropping the word "automatically" for both parts. If you disagree on this point, let me know.

Prose issues (P2)

edit
  • "and by winning qualifying events." - neither WST or WPBSA confirms the remaining spots (outside of invitations) could be given by winning qualifying events. Specifically, I don't see World Snooker Challenge Tour, China Tour, or the continental championships being classed as qualifying events.
  • "and an invitational offer was given to longstanding tour player Jimmy White" - Original research as WPBSA only comments on White receiving a card, and not his previous tour experience.

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Players number lists source checking

edit

Season summary

edit
  • "The season consisted of a series of different tours." - not verified as January 2019 World Snooker season source is broken.
  • "The main tour was the World Snooker Tour, consisting of events that carried both world ranking and invitational points." - same issue as above with January 2019 World Snooker season broken source.

Ranking events (P1)

edit
  • "both of whom had not won a ranking event prior" - I don't see mention of Joyce not winning a ranking event before appearing at the Riga Masters, only Bingtao. Might be simpler to mention it applied to Bingtao in a new sentence, else it's OR.
  • "The first of four Home Nations Series events" - OR as BBC doesnt mention the English Open is a Home Nations Series event.
  • "The first of the Triple Crown tournament events" - OR as The Guardian doesnt state the UK championship is a Triple Crown event.
  • Since it's mentioned the English Open is a Home Nations event, it's a bit confusing there's no mentioned that the Northern Ireland Open is the second Home Nations event (with source of course).
    • "but neither for over 10 years," - Kinda. Junhui's last UK championship win was in 2009, but the 2009 final was on December 13th. As the 2019 final was on December 8th, it's not over ten years. Maguire indeed hasn't won the championship in over ten years. I only looked this up cause 2009+10=2019. A slight reword would work here :)
  • "the Scottish Open, held in December, the third Home Nations event." - sounds choppy with the short bolded sentences.
    • While Sporting Life does confirm the Scottish Open is a Home Nations event, it doesn't specify it was the third.

Ranking events (P2)

edit
  • "This was the first multisession final whitewash since 1989" - Yep. I suggest clarifying it was at the 1989 Grand Prix (snooker) else it sounds like it happened at the 1989 European Masters.
  • "Murphy won his second title of the season at the Welsh Open, defeating Kyren Wilson 9–1." - citation needed
  • I notice there's no mention of the 2020 Indian Open being cancelled to be held in March 2020, despite being a ranking event per the 2019/20 prize money table. A simple sentence saying that it was cancelled and why (with ref) would be sufficient like China Open.
    • TBD
  • "The one-frame timed Snooker Shoot Out" - 2020 BBC (Shoot Out) suggests this was a multiple frame event, not one frame.
  • "Trump won the Players Championship with a score of 10–4 over Yan" - need an extra source as 2020 WST source (Six of the Best) states Trump did win the event, but doesn't mention the score nor finalist.
  • "Gibraltar Open with a score of 4–3 over Kyren Wilson" - since Wilson's already mentioned earlier with the Welsh Open, you can drop his first name.
  • "Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Gibraltar Open was played without a live audience in attendance after the first day, and subsequent events were played without fans." - not verified as March 2020 WST citation and June 2020 Sporting Life citation talk about the Tour Championship and not the Gibraltar Open
  • "The Tour Championship, scheduled for March, was postponed to June." - not verified by Magnificent Maguire. I was going to suggest moving the March 2020 WST citation (Coral Tour postponed) to this spot, but it said it was rescheduled to July of that year.
  • "Maguire only qualified for the event after Ding withdrew due to travel issues surrounding the pandemic" - WST June 2020 (Magnificient Maguire) doesn't state why Ding withdrew for the Tour Championship. Extra source needed if you want to explain its because of the pandemic.
  • "World Snooker Championship, held in July and August" - March 2020 BBC (Crucible postponed) said it was planned to be held in July or August, not that it was held in both months.
  • "Audiences were allowed back during the final" - August 2020 BBC (Fans to be allowed) said fans were to be there for the final, but it hadn't happened yet. Therefore, it's OR. I suggest bumping this citation next to "but this was revoked after the first day" as this sentence is supported. For the audience being part of the World Championship final, I suggest finding a new source to show they did appear.

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ranking events (P3)

edit
  • Since it's mentioned in the infobox that the World Championship is part of the triple crown, it should be added in the prose with a source.
  • "became the second player ever to compile a century of century breaks in a season." - a slight reword is needed as it looks very similar to WST (player of the year) to pass Limited Wording.
    • Also, I know you're trying to say he had 100 century breaks, but "a century of century breaks" sound like Trump has been playing for 100 years. This isn't the case ;) A slight clarification is needd.
    • Sure Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:23, 16 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • "and record breaking 37th ranking title" - not verified by August 2020 WST (player of the year). O'Sullivan won the award for his sixth world title only. If you want to include that it was his 37th title, and it was a record breaker, a separate source is needed. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Other events (P1)

edit
  • "The season began with a series of three pro–am tournaments." - not verified with the broken January 2019 world snooker link or the may 2019 world snooker calendar.
  • " The Vienna Open was won by Mark Joyce, with the Pink Ribbon being won by Bingham." - OR issue as neither event results are mentioned in the May 2019 world snooker calendar.
  • "The 2019 Paul Hunter Classic was won by Barry Hawkins over Wilson with a score of 4–3." - note: i dont have access to snooker scene but i googled it to verify. Hawkins did win the event 4-3 so no issue.
  • "The 2019 Six-red World Championship, a six-red snooker variant tournament" - 2019 world snooker (five-year drought) doesnt explain the concept of six-red.

Other events (P2) and other notes

edit
  • "The Champion of Champions tournament, with participants being winners of events from the prior 12 months" - BBC 2020 (champion of champions dramatic final) doesnt explain the concept of the tournament.
  • Since the Masters is mentioned in the infobox as a triple crown event, it should be mentioned in the prose with source.
  • "but was given the place after defending champion O'Sullivan withdrew." - I know Masters 2020 BBC source doesn't state, but I wonder if it could be found/added why O'Sullivan withdrew from the Masters. Especially since he was defending champ.
  • "The year-long Championship League event was won by Scott Donaldson before the onset of the pandemic" - OR for 2 reasons. Eurosport March 2020 (700th century) only mentions the first day of the Winner's Group, and not Donaldson's winning the League. Second reason is that there's no mention of the pandemic.
  • "with a second Championship League organised as a test event for returning to play after the lockdown. The second event was won by Luca Brecel." - similar OR issues with World SNooker (Brecel Edges). The source talks about the matches on June 2nd, way before the Winners stage matches from June 9th to 11th. Therefore, it's not confirmed Brecel won the 2nd championship league. Also, no mention it was a test event after lockdown.
  • There are many missing events in this section and above. Haining Open (October non-ranking), all 11 of the Challenge Tour (including playoffs) and all 3 World Seniors events. Q school is also skipped. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 07:13, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Calendar

edit

To check: individual winners/score per table sources

  • The 2019/19 Snooker season (assume it's a typo?) from World Snooker published January 2019 is broken. Internet Archive doesn't have a copy :/
  • The 2019/20 Snooker season from World Snooker has lots of missing info.
    • The Vienna Open, Pink Ribbon, World Seniors Championship, 2019–20 Championship League, Haining Open, UK Seniors Championship, European Masters, 2020 Championship League, Tour Championship, World Championship and World Seniors Championship are not mentioned at all with the 2019//20 World Snooker calendar from May 2019.
    • The dates for Challenge Tour 5, Challenge Tour 10 and Challenge Tour Playoffs contradict the July 2019 World Snooker source of the Tour calendar. Was these dates changed cause of the pandemic? There's no mention in the Season summary prose.
    • With the given three sources before the table, I cannot verify what type of event (world, non-ranking, pro-am, etc.) these events were.
    • The three sources before the table also don't mention the country & venue the events were held in. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
    • All covered in new citation from snooker.org.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

World ranking points (WST table source)

edit
  • Grand prize for European Masters is 75k, not 80k.
  • R128 prize money for Shoot Out says 0 pounds, not 250 pounds. However, based on that note saying first round participates would receive money (and not part of their rankings), it suggests that there might be a R128 prize for Shoot Out. If that's the case, extra source needed to verify this. Otherwise, it needs swapping to 0 pounds.
  • Gibraltar Open semi-final/final prizes are 12k and 25k, not 20k and 50k.
  • "Players who lose their first match receive no ranking points" - not 100% if this correct. Closest I see is first match losers will receive their money but it will not count to their money ranking.
  • I don't see a connection to the first match prize money with the World Championship for note 2. I do see seeded loser with 0 pounds for R144, R112 and R80, but I don't see an explanation to it in the points under the table at WST. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Finalists in ranking tournaments

edit

Overall

edit

I will have to fail this article in terms of broadness and original research. There are many events missing in the prose that were held: Haining Open, 12 events of the Challenge Tour (including playoffs) and 3 World Seniors events. Alternativelly, the Indian Open that was cancelled is omitted despite mention of the China Open being cancelled. For Original Research issues, I see many instances where the prose is not backed up by the given source, For example, the 2 Championship League events are not backed up by their given sources as the citations are not about the event's final. Similarilly, the given source for Vienna Open and Pink Ribbon does not cover any results from the events. Another instance is sources talking about Tour Championship is cited for Gibralatar Open and China Open. Otherwise, I see citation missing for Welsh Open. This is not counting any of the other OR instances, like 37th world title for O'Sullivan.

There is also out of date information in the Players section. It's currently citing an old World Snooker source that can be resolved with WPBSA, such as the number of professional players and that James Wattana also received an invitational. With these two criteria, I believe that a lot of work is needed before this article can become GA. Usually, I'd leave it open on hold. However, having 17 events missing from the prose makes it a long way from reaching broadness. Also, having 6 events missing verification on their finals, out of date information on the players plus other instances where the prose doesnt match the citation makes this a mixture of OR and verification issues. I hope you choose to work on this article and renominate this to GAN in the future :)

To the next reviewer if this article does get renominated: I didn't review the citations in the calendar table nor look at the lead and infobox. These will need examining too. However, main issues are verification/Original research and broadness at the moment. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago20 comments2 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2019–20 snooker season/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: L235 (talk · contribs) 19:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)Reply


Looking forward to picking this up in the next few days. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi L235, did you have any comments for me? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Yes, very sorry about the delay, this is high on the list! Apologies, unexpected wikiwork has come up recently but this is a priority. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
No pressure on this L235, but did you have anything for me? Uni work is much more important, so don't worry if it's a drama. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 6 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for nominating this article to be a good article. Apologies for the lengthy delay. I have gone through the article and its sources a few times, and will be posting my notes soon. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 08:39, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Blockers

edit

These are questions that I would like to be answered before promoting the article:

  • "The World Snooker Tour in the 2019–20 season consisted of a field of 128 professional players." -- Why the source discrepancy between the two sources? Is it that the first one is comparatively outdated?
  • In the calendar, Shoot Out - what is the source for this being 1-0?
  • "Austria, the first time in any snooker season" - source? Is this repeated in the body somewhere? I didn't spot it at a glance.
  • Is it generally accepted practice to rank players by number of wins, and then by number of runner-ups? If so, is this documented somewhere?
  • How did you choose what counts as "major invitational events"? Is there a generally accepted list somewhere? (potential NOR/SYNTH?)
    • It's just a list of the ones that the World Snooker Tour either run, or are associated with. This is a copy of the calendar that they provide. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
      • I'm still vaguely uncomfortable with this, as there are events on the cited calendar (such as the Q School) that aren't listed, which could be a NOR issue as I'm not sure how the inclusion criteria was decided. But it's not a big enough NOR problem to hold the article back, as the information that is present in the article is verifiable. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 05:34, 8 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Suggestions

edit

These suggestions are not blockers to promotion:

  • I strongly suggest using the {{abbr}} template on the World ranking points table especially, and also the Calendar. (this caused me quite some confusion when first reading)
  • "The 2019–20 snooker season was a series of professional snooker tournaments played between 9 May 2019 and 22 August 2020." - worth commenting on how this was longer than normal?
  • "tour card" - consider defining this, perhaps parenthetically, first
  • Why list just the two-season tour card players and not all the players?
  • calendar table - link the redlinked Challenge Tour events to 2019–20 Challenge Tour, perhaps?
  • "Judd Trump won six tournaments, the most in a single season" -- consider "the most of any individual player in a single season"
  • consider moving footnote 44 to the end of the paragraph, because right now it's not clear that 45 is verifying the entire paragraph
  • Suggest c/e on note 1 to "First round losers in the Shoot Out, Coral World Grand Prix, Coral Players Championship and Coral Tour Championship will receive their prize money in full; however, this money will not count towards the prize money rankings."
  • Suggest c/e on note to to add a period at the end.
  • If you have time, I'd prettify the references a bit -- "Archived copy" as the page title is a bit uneasy, for example.
  • I spotted a non-MOS:DASH-compliant "4-0"; haven't had a chance to search for other occurrences but good to look out for. Added KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 05:26, 8 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Notes

edit

Other miscellaneous notes:

  • Great job with this article! I can tell it was a lot of work to compile.
  • There's quite some OR in this article, and it's right on the edge of what I view as acceptable for a GA. The tables are almost entirely all compiled by hand, for instance, and it can be easy to hit SYNTH when doing so (e.g. how do you decide what is a significant enough invitational to go in the table?). This is probably typical for sports articles, but it's on the upper bound of what I would feel comfortable promoting.
  • I haven't yet gone through the "Season summary" section carefully yet, but I see that most of the concerns from there were resolved in GA1. But I'll be sure to do so before final passage.
  • I wish we didn't have to rely so heavily on primary sources (worldsnooker.com itself) so often, but I understand the need to in sports-related articles. Added KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 05:37, 8 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Congrats on your hard work here and for nominating this GAN. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 09:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Assessment

edit
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

I am passing this GA. Congratulations on your successful nomination! I would still encourage looking at the other suggestions; though not blockers to GA status, they may be helpful in improving the article. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 05:37, 8 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2019–20_snooker_season&oldid=1196852087"