Talk:2019 Six-red World Championship

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Cwmhiraeth
Good article2019 Six-red World Championship 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 Six-red World Championship is part of 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
September 23, 2019Good article nomineeListed
October 13, 2022Good topic candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 2, 2019.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the winners of the 2019 World Cup doubles snooker event competed as opponents in the final of the 2019 Six-red World Championship?
Current status: Good article
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:12, 25 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Created by Lee Vilenski (talk). Self-nominated at 22:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC).Reply

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Once you do a QPQ this is ready to go. The article already satisfies length standards so you can keep expanding the article. epicgenius (talk) 00:37, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Added a QPQ which I am reviewing now: Epicgenius Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 07:32, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Lee Vilenski: Good to go now. I don't think it matters that you finished a review, just that you started it. I may be wrong, though, but trust that you will actually finish that QPQ. epicgenius (talk) 13:39, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
I don't think it matters too much. The reviews normally change a lot between the initial review and it being on main page anyway, I doubt this would all work if we forced every review to get to that stage for QPQ. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:44, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Lee Vilenski, epicgenius, in order for a QPQ to qualify, it needs to have reached the point where all the DYK criteria have been covered and a review icon given, even if that is a query or "maybe" or even "no" icon rather than one of the two ticks. If a tick isn't given, the reviewer typically sticks around to check that the requested improvements are done, but that isn't required for QPQ credit to be obtained. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
BlueMoonset, does this mean i would have to stick around to see if Lee Vilenski has done the QPQ? I don't think it makes much of a difference in either case. I just find it an inconvenience to revoke the tick only to place it again a few hours/days later. epicgenius (talk) 15:59, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
epicgenius, I think at this point, since the only thing that is missing from the QPQ is the icon and neither of you seem to have been aware that it was needed, there's no need to revoke the tick here. Lee Vilenski will surely put it in place shortly (and if they forget, the eventual promoter will likely remind them before this goes to prep). BlueMoonset (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:2019 Six-red World Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 09:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


Comments

That's all for a first review, so it's on hold. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:10, 19 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Lee, let me know when you're done? Cheers. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:40, 22 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Sorry TRM, all done. Thought I'd already replied Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:52, 22 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Lee, still plenty of source names in the ref titles.... The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:53, 22 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
Whoops, I only got the ones defined in the reflist. All done now. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:59, 22 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I made a couple of tweaks but I'm happy with the article now in terms of GA so I'm promoting, good work, onto the next one! The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:56, 23 September 2019 (UTC)Reply