Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2022 Masters (snooker)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 26 October 2022 [1].


Nominator(s): User:HurricaneHiggins, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 2022 edition of the Masters (snooker). A fantastic event, looking forward to your feedback! Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Henni147

edit

Followed this tournament closely myself on TV, so I'm familiar with the topic and would like to contribute to this FAC review.

  • Structure: logical and uniform with other tournament articles. Pass.
  • Tournament ladder: properly formatted and sourced. Haven't checked MOS:ACCESS for screenreaders yet, but since it's the same template as in other articles that have passed the FAC review already, it's probably fine.
  • Final table: properly formatted and sourced, and seems to satisfy MOS:DTT as well. Pass.
  • Century break section: properly sourced and formatting uniform with other tournament articles. Pass.
    • Footnote: I wondered if 26 century breaks are a lot or rather average for recent Masters tournaments. If the information is available, it might be useful to add the century record of the event until then, and by how much it was missed in the 2022 edition.
  • Images: copyright status looks fine for all.
  • Referencing: inline citations and sources consistently formatted arcoss the page. Pass.
  • Copyright: quick run with Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows no serious violations. Need to check citation of direct quotes, but looks good overall.

Linking:

Content and wording: In general, the prose part is nicely written. Especially the summary section is very informative, rich in variety, and phrased as reader-friendly as a tournament summary can be. Very well done.

  • Lead:
    • Remove The from "The 16 competitors were invited [...]". The players weren't mentioned in the lead previously.
    • "cutoff date" → missing hyphen in "cut-off date" in accordance with Collins Dictionary. Same issue in "Participants" section.
    • "Ding Junhui, who had made 15 consecutive Masters appearances [...]" → This is rather a matter of taste, but I would flip the sub-clauses in order to make them more compact and vary the wording of the paragraph a bit: "Ding Junhui, who dropped to 27th place in the rankings, missed the Masters after 15 consecutive appearances between 2007 and 2021. The only debutant in 2022 was Zhao Xintong, who entered the top 16 for the first time by winning the UK Championship." A similar re-phrasing might brush up the quality of the "Participants" section as well.
      • Yeah, I think I prefer categorising that Ding was previously in the tournament (thus why we should care) and then state why he wasn't competing. I realise we could say that Xintong had entered the first time at the UK was the only debutant, but I feel that "there was just one debutant" is the important part. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overview:
  • Participants:
    • "[...] who were ranked highest in the world rankings after the UK Championship in December 2021." → maybe note the exact cut-off date instead of December 2021.
  • First round:

That's it from me so far. I will continue with the QF section, when the article has been updated. The article looks very promising overall, and with the few issues being fixed, I will give my support. Good job. Henni147 (talk) 10:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fair. I'll make necessary changes today. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 07:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked my way through the above Henni147 - fantastic work, some great suggestions. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Great. I agree with your comments above, so feel free to keep those parts as they are. I can take a look at the remaining prose sections now and give some comments about content and linking as above. Henni147 (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More comments from Henni147:

  • Quarter-finals:
    • According to MOS:EMDASH there should be no spacing around em dashes. Also, MOS:SPARETHEDASH says that there should better be a max of two dashes per sentence to keep the structure clear. My suggestion is: "The quarter-finalists comprised six former champions with O'Sullivan, Williams, Higgins, Robertson, Trump and Selby,[49] and two former runners-up—Hawkins, who lost to O'Sullivan in 2016, [...]"
    • Maybe also add "comprised six former Masters champions" to make clear what kind of champions we're talking about.
    • "Robertson noted the difficulty of competing at the Masters against O'Sullivan, commenting" → add a colon after "commenting".
  • General:
    • This is a matter of taste, but I prefer to call players with their full name at their first mentioning in each round. As a long-time snooker follower I am familiar with the players, but casual readers may not, so it might be helpful to read their full name once per section (especially with family names like Wilson, which multiple players share).
    • According to MOS:LINKONCE, links should ideally be inserted at their first occurance in the article body. So you may remove the links from "red ball" in the QF section as well as "snooker" in the SF section, and link them at their first appearance in the second to last paragraph of the first round: "[...], as Trump required a snooker with one red remaining. However, Allen failed to escape from a snooker and went in-off, [...]"

Yeah, that's actually it. I really liked to read the second part of the prose. The direct quotes were nicely selected and the "Final" section was very informative. Didn't realize that Hawkins had lost all his Triple Crown finals until now. I give my support for FAC now. Great job! Henni147 (talk) 15:14, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment - over three weeks in with only a single support. This one's liabile to be archived in a couple days without substantial movement towards a consensus to promote. Hog Farm Talk 21:23, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Working on it. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:28, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Olivaw-Daneel

edit

Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 10:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All seems very fair. I'll take a better look later. Thanks for the review. I will say I usually try and stay away from talking about things that happen at the event (in terms of victories and such) unless they are particularly notable. I get we can state who the winner defeated to reach the final, but when I've done that it always feels like puff. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some changes above Olivaw-Daneel - did you have any more thoughts for me? :) Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:20, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's all I had (+ a note above). And I guess if there's nothing else notable to say about the event, the lead is ok. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 05:26, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BennyOnTheLoose

edit

Image review

edit

File:2022 Cazoo Masters Snooker Tournament Logo.jpg: I have my doubts that a logo this simple would be considered copyrightable in the US, but it's a borderline case. The licence, source and rationale are fine for a non-free logo, though, so it's no big deal. Everything else seems OK. ALT text is OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

Thanks for taking a look Nikkimaria, I've taken a look through all of the above and made the changes. Hopefully I didn't miss any of the authors. Let me know if you have any more items for me to look at on this nomination. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:53, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've covered the bits I missed the first time, let me know if there is anything further, Nikkimaria. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.