Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2017 World Snooker Championship/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 30 May 2020 [1].

2017 World Snooker Championship edit

Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 2017 edition of the World Snooker Championship. Qualifying for the event featured both a maximum break, and the longest frame in snooker history (over two hours!). Mark Selby won his third world title, defeating four-time champion John Higgins in the final 18-15 winning £375,000. Selby was six frames behind at 10-4; the biggest deficit for a champion since the 1985 World Snooker Championship.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from TRM edit

I'll review this in due course, placeholder at the moment. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC) Here we go (and this will be submitted to my WikiCup account):[reply]

  • " It was the 19th and final ranking event of the 2016–17 season. " a small jarring sentence right at the start of the lead. Needs merging or combining somehow.
  • "This was the" It was.
  • "marking the 40th anniversary of the first staging of the event at this venue." unless something special happened, this is self-evident from the previous clause.
  • No WPBSA link or mention in the prose as organisers.
  • "the title in 2014 and 2016" maybe avoid those Easter eggs by "the 2014 and 2016 tournaments" piping "2016 tournaments"?
  • And perhaps "It was" rather than "This was"
  • "World Snooker" link?
  • "The world championship sees 32 " only just noticed, but this introduction is year-specific so it should say something like "The 2017 tournament saw..."
  • Again, on a re-read "Stephen Hendry is the most successful" should be "As of 2020,..."
    • Done.. Although, this years tournament hasn't been played yet. Not that Steve Davis or Ray Reardon are competing. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • " the 2016/2017 season " slash/dash consistency.
  • " at the English Institute of Sport from " our article doesn't make it clear where this was. Could be one of several places.
  • "The number of frames needed to win a match increased with each proceeding round of the main draw, starting with best-of-19-frames matches..." too many number/best of frames in one sentence. Rephrase, perhaps like "The first round was played as a best-of-19... "
  • "including 110 of the remaining 112 players " why not all of them?
  • "As with the main draw," draw is mentioned three times in this sentence.
  • "with the BBC's coverage of the Triple Crown events extended" needs explanation as to the relevance of this.
  • Link "streamed".
  • Don't need to link Asia or South America.

This takes me to the Tournament summary. I will continue (hopefully) tomorrow! The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Next

  • " World Professional Snooker and Billiards Association" WPBSA, not WPSBA!
  • "The top 16 seeds automatically qualified " Don't you mean the top 16 ranked players in the world automatically qualified as seeds?
  • " modern era of the game" only just struck me but what defines that era?
  • "at the Crucible: apply that correct lower cap t to other instances of The Crucible.
  • Anthony McGill doesn't need dab.
  • "2002 champion" etc I think there are a few instances where you could link tournament.
  • "Ebdon achieved the three snookers needed," he needed 15, unless they were down to the blue, that's four snookers?
    • Not so. You can gain more than four points from snookers at any point. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "becoming" to become.
  • Neil Robertson and John Higgins don't need dab.
  • "Seven former world champions qualified for the last 16:" sixteen.
  • "not won a match" not previously?
  • "to send the match" -> "which would have sent the match"
  • "was awarded the highest break " no need for "awarded"
  • " World Snooker " is overlinked.
  • "ahead.[71][36] " order.
  • "Match Score" score.
  • Why century breaks in italics?
  • Full stop after the "Mark Selby wins.."
  • "Adam Stefanow " doesn't ave a diacritic or our article is wrong.
  • "Sunny Akani " is piped to a redirect back to itself.
  • "including a maximum break compiled by Gary Wilson in frame four of his first qualifying round win over Josh Boileau.[" max break overlinked, Boileau overlinked.
  • Check completeness of refs, e.g. 73 and 74 have no dates.
  • Some refs have the publisher name in the ref title, e.g. refs 4, 6...

That's it for the remainder. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 16:49, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Games of the world edit

Comment I dislike the seeds in the first 2 rounds being in brackets. I think it is a little redundant and should be without. I think the footnote where if the defending champ is outside of the top 16 for seeding purposes is redundant in this case and should be removed. 15-minute tip replacement break. Probably reads better as a 15 minute break to replace the tip. Also think TV coverage (should be near where your setting everything up with prize money etc) and the prose of qualifying could be above the main draw stuff as it kind of gets lost. Games of the world (talk) 10:28, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with all of the above, apart from the qualifying, which is always in this location. The prose in front of the qualifying section is for who could take part, whereas the summary of the qualifying is in the tournament summary section. See MOS:SNOOKER for more info. I have addressed the points in the article otherwise, thanks for taking a look Games of the world. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:42, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing I can see is this "The top 16 players in the latest world rankings automatically qualified for the main draw as seeded players.[5] Mark Selby was seeded first overall as the defending champion, while the remaining 15 seeds were allocated based on the latest world rankings, released after the penultimate event of the season, the China Open.[5]" Suggest a rephrase of this little section as latest is not specific to a time. Suggest either saying seeds set on x date or after the china open, with Mark Selby.... Games of the world (talk) 17:22, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Games of the world I have reworded this. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:26, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Games of the world - could I consider this a support/oppose for this FAC? Thanks for taking a look for me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, was having a mini break. Support Decent clean article, well written, even before the copy editing below. Games of the world (talk) 20:12, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from BennyOnTheLoose edit

The article seems to me to be comprehensive, neutral, well-written and suitably referenced. I've got a couple of suggestions.

  • Format: "at the amateur championship." Link is to 2018 WSF Championship which is all good, but any reason not to use the WSF title in the article? There's a long-established English Amateur Championship that used to be seen as a stepping stone to the professional ranks.
    • I've changed slightly. I don't want to use the official name, as it is in prose, and I wanted to define it as what it stands for, rather than another acronym. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prize fund: might be worth a few words spelling out what the "rolling 147 prize" was about.
    • Well, it says it's a prize for making a maximum break. I'm not sure what else you can say. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • The "rolling" bit is about the prize increasing as time went on if no-one made a maximum in tournaments. It's covered in Maximum break so may not need anything else in this article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:40, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quarter-finals: "predicted that he was now the favourite": You can't predict the present. I think the right phrasing would be something more like "opined that Selby was now the favourite"; "offered his assessment that Selby was now..."; or maybe "predicted that Selby was the most likely player to win."
  • Quarter-finals:"his subsequent clearance of 146" - only part of the break was subsequent to running out of position. Consider either omitting "subsequent" or saying something like "his consequent clearance of 146"
  • Quarter-finals: I know I tend to over-link, but consider linking "clearance" to the Cue Sports Glossary.
  • Semi-finals: "which was effectively a rematch of the previous year's final" - I think the word "effectively" could be deleted.
  • Semi-finals: " Higgins took leads of 5–3, 10–6, and 16–8 after each of the first three sessions,". How about "Higgins held the lead after the end of each of the first three sessions, at 5–3, 10–6, and at 16–8"? (There is undoubtedly a better was to phrase this, but he didn't have those three leads after each session.)
  • Final: "a repeat" - maybe "a rematch"? (Outcome was different.)

Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:54, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Rodney Baggins edit

Overview intro section
  • "the sport was played" > "the sport was originally played" (but actually it was first played in India so that wouldn't be strictly true either!)
    • Reworded
  • link world championship in "the official world championship of the game of snooker"?
  • link China, Hong Kong and Thailand?
  • "As of 2020" is not really necessary (unless you're using the As of template for the purpose of keeping it updated)
    • See TRM's comments earlier. I don't like this auto updating, as it means no one is checking to see if it is still true. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "England's Mark Selby" > for consistency we should put "Scotland's Stephen Hendry" in previous sentence? And "England's Joe Davis" higher up!?
  • "The winner of the 2017 event earned prize money of £375,000, from a total pool of £1,750,000." – is this sentence necessary here as it's repeating info presented directly below in the Prize fund subsection?
  • Since World Snooker is a subsidiary of WPBSA, why mention both? Suggest "The event was organised by World Snooker, a subsidiary of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association."
First round

I've made quite a few changes to this section (hope you don't mind), but here are some outstanding points:

  • "Prior to the tournament Trump had proclaimed"... not sure about the word "proclaimed" – can you think of a better word, maybe "declared" or "announced"?
  • "Seven former world champions progressed to the second round:" – using just surnames in this list looks odd, especially as Shaun Murphy not yet been mentioned
    • Yeah, the Murphy thing I've changed. I didn't realise. The last names my hands are tied; that is how we should refer to established characters in a prose-list. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Xiao Guodong was the only first-round winner who had not previously won a match at the Crucible" – not sure about this sentence as it's not backed up by ref.38 and I think it might be original research!? It also has no context: maybe mention that he defeated 16th seed Ryan Day in his first round match 10–4? Mention that he made the first round in 2014 but lost to Ali Carter?
    • Changed to a much more interesting bit on there being no Welsh players in the last 16. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mark Selby / Shaun Murphy / John Higgins matches are not mentioned – is it worth including who they defeated to progress to second round?
  • Kyren Wilson / Barry Hawkins / Mark Allen matches are not mentioned at all – is this because their matches were not notable?
    • 31 matches are a lot to cover - I generally only cover all at 16 player events or less. Could easily add a sentence ranking off match wins, but it usually looks like overkill. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Second round
  • "...with Stephen Maguire the only unseeded player to progress to the quarter-finals." I think this information is prematurely placed at the top of the section. It's also mentioned in the QF section ("Stephen Maguire, the only qualifier to reach the quarter-finals...") so are we maybe overstating it a bit? Suggest you could move it into the image caption: "Stephen Maguire was the only unseeded player to progress to the quarter-finals." as the caption is currently just repeating info word for word from body text (about him reaching his first World Championship quarter-final since 2012.)
Final
  • "In reaching the final, Higgins moved to second in the world rankings, behind Selby." – Would Higgins have been ranked second in any eventuality (whether he'd won OR lost the final)? If not, this should read: "As runner-up in the championship, Higgins moved to second in the world rankings, behind Selby."
    • The source in question says "his run moves him up to second in the world rankings behind his opponent." I wouldn't want to comment further, as it'd be OR. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Dates
  • Ref.33 (Calendar 2016/2017) doesn't confirm the first round took place between 15 and 20 April 2017. It just confirms the start date of the main competition, but individual stages are not specified in the list.
  • Do we need to source the dates of each round? First round 15 to 20 April 2017; Second round 20 & 24 April 2017; Quarter-finals 25 & 26 April 2017; Semi-finals 27 to 29 April 2017; Final 30 April & 1 May 2017.
References
  • Ref.1 just puts me through to British Newspaper Archive registration page
    • The article does mention the "professional snooker championship" but not that it is annual or even that 1927 was the first event. I'm sure a better online source is available. As a reserve option, the Billiards Association and Control Council Handbook for 1927-28 says "the Control Council is responsible for the promotion of the Professional Championship of English Billiards and has this year instituted a competition for the Professional Championship of Snooker which promises to become an annual event of the first importance." (p.51) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • As these are offline sources (or ones I don't have access too), I've been relying on people letting me know if its suitable (that's "its", Rodders!) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref.26. is pointing to Eleven Sports main page and the archive version provided doesn't mention 2017 WSC final at all
  • Ref.38 has wrong title, should be "World Snooker Championship 2017: Frame scores, complete results & highest break"
  • Ref.66 has no work alias, e.g. website=espn.co.uk
  • Ref.77. has title "Matches – World Snooker Live Scores" but it might be best to change to "Betfred World Championship Qualifiers" as it's not a live score page any more

Rodney Baggins (talk) 14:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rodney, anything further? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:16, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lee, I've had a good look through and these are my outstanding queries following on from previous comments:
  • In Overview, you've changed sentence to "the sport was played by those in the United Kingdom" which I'm not keen on. I quite like the wording used in the 2019 World Snooker Championship article: "the sport was popular in the British Isles", however we also need to be careful about the exact location – are we talking about the UK, Great Britain or maybe just England? What do the sources say about that? Maybe "the sport was popular in Great Britain" is the safest bet here?
  • In sentence: "event was organised by World Snooker, a subsidiary of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association," I would unlink World Snooker as it just links you to the Overview of the WPBSA article which is not specifically about the World Snooker subsidiary, so doesn't seem to benefit the reader (might just confuse).
    • I'm in the process of updating the WPBSA article, which will take a while. I've slightly expanded the World Snooker bit - I'm not sure whether WPBSA owning 26% against Matchroom's 51% still means it is a "subsidiary." BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know you've changed things around a bit concerning the Stephen Maguire info in Second round section, but I actually have an issue with putting this clause in the first paragraph: "with Stephen Maguire the only unseeded player to progress to the quarter-finals" as it seems out of place chronologically and I see no reason to mention it until a bit later. Maybe lower down, try: "Stephen Maguire defeated Rory McLeod 13–3 with a session to spare, to reach his first World Championship quarter-final since 2012. Maguire was the only unseeded player to progress to the quarter-finals." — Then maybe you could combine the two mini-facts into the caption, something like: "Stephen Maguire reached the last eight for the first time since 2012, the only unseeded player to progress to the quarter-finals."
  • The Ref.1 problem is still there (currently just links to British Newspaper Archive registration page) but I wonder if Benny can do anything to help us with that?
    • I can probably dig something up. I think there are two parts that need verification - it's annual (now), and it's official. Looking at the following sentence, does "modern times" equate to the "modern era" as per footnote a, or what sort of period? The source used doesn't mention Hong Kong or Thailand - how about adding something like This or This or This? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The snooker.org ref. should probably be used to source the dates for all rounds, just a case of adding in a few ref tags. I can do that if you like.
Cheers, Rodney Baggins (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've made some further edits, Rodney Baggins Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:46, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lee, looks good to me. Happy to support now! Rodney Baggins (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Rodney, tks for checking refs above -- can I check if you're signing off on the reliability of the sources used? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ian, yes I'm satisfied that these are all reliable sources. The only one we had issues with was the first citation, which has now been changed to a Sheffield Star article; whilst it does back up the information presented, I'm aware that it's a daily tabloid so you might want to check its reputability. Other than that, everything's fine source-wise. Cheers, Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Can I ask (Lee or Rodney, I don't mind) where I'd find the sourcing for all the tables in the Qualifying section? It's not obvious to me... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Full qualifying round results are given in this Sporting Life source: [2] I've added a couple of ref tags into the article for now, but the tables probably need a brief intro sentence to accommodate the tags so they're not just hanging there. Rodney Baggins (talk) 10:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be a good idea, tks. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:44, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like Rodney's already covered it Ian Rose. I'll do a slight bit of cleanup. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie edit

I'll copyedit as I go through; please revert anything you don't like.

  • I think "Highest televised break" is more logical than "Televised highest break".
  • I tried looking in the reference for the "Prize fund" section to see if the source used "Televised highest break", and as far as I can tell it doesn't give any information about the breaks, so I think another source is needed there.
  • There's some repetition between the "Format" section and the "Seeding and qualifying rounds" section. For example, do we need to be told twice that qualifiers had to win three best-of-19 matches?
    • Isn't it a little important to denote how many they would need to win when describing the rounds.
  • Up to you, but it might be worth mentioning that O'Sullivan's last-16 streak went one more year, so he passed Griffiths' record.
  • None of the five debutants, David Grace, Noppon Saengkham, Gary Wilson, Yan Bingtao, and Zhou Yuelong, made it to the second round. I don't think we need to name them; they were listed at the end of the previous section.
  • and predicted that he was now the favourite to win the championship: redundant: either "and said that he was now the favourite to win the championship" or "and predicted that he would win the championship".
  • The "modern era" is considered to be after the 1968–69 snooker season. Suggest making this "considered to begin with"; as written I read it as saying the modern era began the following season.
    • Done. 17:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Not much wrong here; once these minor points are fixed I expect to support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Your changes look good. I took out the mention of the televised break of 146 in the lead too, assuming you just overlooked it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, the bit about the prize money is the non-cited bit; winning the highest break is important, so I returned this. Thanks again for taking a look at this one. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I should have thought of that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/2017_World_Snooker_Championship/archive1&oldid=959749792"