Talk:Liang Wenbo

Liang Wenbo is currently a Other sports good article nominee. Nominated by Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} at 21:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Short description: Chinese former snooker player

Liang Wenbo was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 17, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Snooker Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Snooker, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of snooker on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SnookerWikipedia:WikiProject SnookerTemplate:WikiProject SnookerSnooker articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Tone

I added the "inappropriate tone" tag because parts of this article are written in journalese. 86.133.55.88 (talk) 03:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name spelling

Is there any authoritative source? Most Chinese given names are hyphenated when transliterated into the Latin alphabet (e.g. Ding Jun-hui). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 15:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation / phonology

I have a problem with this (in the second paragraph of the "2008 World Championships" section):

Walker introduced him as "Should he stay or should he go... Liang Wenbo", despite the rhyme occurring because of a mispronunciation of his name ("bo" is pronounced "bore" in Chinese).

I don't know how the ending of Mr. Liang's name should be pronounced, and I don't have a Chinese-speaker on hand to consult, but "bore" is not a useful description of anything. This might represent /bO/ (e.g. England) /bo:r/ (e.g. Scotland) or /bOr/ (e.g. USA).

I suggest that everything after the comma be deleted. I think it represents a misunderstanding. /o/ is the same, to an English-speaker's ears, as the vowel in "go". Indeed, for many Scots speakers of English, they are the same.

It also ruins a joke to explain it.

--Nyelvmark (talk) 19:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted point

Why at the end of Wenbo's 2010/11 has someone deleted my point about him no longer being in the top 16? for under the new rules he isn't! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.203.254.3 (talk) 19:58, 7 November 2010

Because you haven't added a reliable source to it and it was not written in neutral point of view. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 20:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So rather than just deleting it, why not actually bother to put the source in. The bottom half of the whole of the 2010 season hasn;t got any references either? --157.203.254.3 (talk) 03:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They have been added. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 03:39, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So why were they there in ther first place without references and yet my innocent addition of his up to date ranking, which was later referenced to world snooker, stamped on and deleted? --157.203.254.3 (talk) 03:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well? why was my addition stamped upon and the other un sourced text allowed to stay? --157.203.254.3 (talk) 04:08, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was newly added unsourced material. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 04:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

and at some point so were the other points and why were you able to add all the sources and not the source for my easily well known fact? it appears that in light of the other material on there you chose to single my addition out and delete it and not the other unsourced material. --157.203.254.3 (talk) 05:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why when I put a source refference to the World snooker website ranking page was the refference deleted and then a call for a source to be added? --157.203.254.3 (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because the source is not stable, and it changes at the next cut-off point after the UK Championship and then it will become a non-relevant source for this fact. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 13:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So why is his current ranking listed as 21 - which is worng and also unsourced. THat's thepoint the rankings do no change, you're making a very pedandtic point. For when the ranking changes, it can get changed. --90.216.169.55 (talk) 13:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The rankings will change after the 2010 UK Championship. See this. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 19:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know that, we all do, so what? the point is, the 2010/11 section ended by saying he was inside the top 16! which he wasn't, I edited it to say that due to not getting the results in the early part of the season, he dropped out of the top 16. Why delete that factually correct and sourced material to his ranking of 20 to leave a hopelessly out of date statement that he was a top 16 player? It makes no sense to delete it and leave something out of date. --157.203.254.3 (talk) 21:47, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that sources should contain the information for which they are cited, but if the source changes after a while, then is will not contain this information and will become an unusable source for this fact. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 22:02, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Armbrust is wrong and the IPs edit is sound. To the IP: never assume that everyone here is sensible, because they're not. The best thing to do is to read the policies and apply them like a lawyer -- that way, nobody can accuse you of doing wrong. Also, it's best to get an account because IPs are treated like lepers here, no matter how sensible their edits. About your point that some material wasn't sourced: some editors routinely remove new unsourced info even if old info is unsourced. Like I said, not everything here is sensible. Some dislike IPs and just revert them on sight; they can get away with it because IPs are second-class citizens. Also, you shouldn't always trust what anyone says: ask for help from others and read the policies and guidelines. You can go here to ask questions, or post on my talk page. I also recommend getting an account so that your opinion has more weight. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evening Christopher Connor thank you, I have a username, just didn't bother to sign in. It just makes me laugh that someone would rather delete a simple fact and something easily known and thus leave in it's place something out of date and unsourced. I take on board the point about the source changing as the rankings change, but trying to pin a source down for this is like trying to source a reference for a Premiership football team going outiside the top six mid way through a season - it changes.--Westhouses18b (talk) 23:08, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No policy prohibits a source that might change in the future. To remove a valid reliable source and swap it with a 'cite needed' tag is a misunderstanding of policy or, at worse, disruptive editing. You may have noticed that Armbrust aggressively removes all new unsourced content, no matter how true, uncontentious, and easily verifiable. Now it seems that sourced info is being removed too. Christopher Connor (talk) 23:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evening Christopher Connor (talk) thank you again for the additional comment. the source I added was directly from the World Snooker website, what more could you ask for. I'm trying to resist "personal attacks" however I find Amburts agressive deletion stance extremly distasteful and against the purpose of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Westhouses18b (talk • contribs) 00:15, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Armburst, perhaps you might like to revise the following? Liang also participates at the Players Tour Championship, his best performace coming at the third European event, where he reached the final, but lost 0-4 against Liang Wenbo.[40 --157.203.255.1 (talk) 22:18, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oooops! Corrected. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 22:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Number Two

he has recently been overtaken in the rankings by Xiao Guodong so this is now out of date source world ranking list on worldsnooker.com talk QueenAlexandria 14:24, 15 Nov 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Liang Wenbo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080410222021/http://www.globalsnookercentre.co.uk:80/files/Rankings/2007-8-prov-ranks.htm to http://www.globalsnookercentre.co.uk/files/Rankings/2007-8-prov-ranks.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:49, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Liang Wenbo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070814222934/http:/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070815153604/http:/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070322185315/http:/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070814221209/http:/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20070818192354/http:/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.globalsnookercentre.co.uk/files/Results/2005-6/06worldqual.htm
Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/69tDLWozD to http://www.worldsnooker.com/staticFiles/1d/b0/0,,13165~176157,00.pdf
Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130611202605/http://www.worldsnooker.com:80/staticFiles/49/bc/0,,13165~179273,00.pdf to http://www.worldsnooker.com/staticFiles/49/bc/0,,13165~179273,00.pdf
Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150422073001/http://www.worldsnooker.com:80/sweet-16-through-to-sheffield/ to http://www.worldsnooker.com/sweet-16-through-to-sheffield/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Liang Wenbo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:16, 15 May 2017 (==UTC)

Chinese Number 4

Needs updating 1) Ding (9) 2) Yan (22) 3) Xiao (23) 4) Lyu (31) 5) Zhou (32) 6) Li Hang (33) 7) Liang (37) (talk QueenAlexandria 21:55, 2 Apr 2019 (UTC)

Where did you get this info from? According to seeding rev.9 for 2018/2019 world rankings, the Chinese players are ordered thus:

Ding (9)
Xiao (20)
Yan (23)
Liang (32)

Thanks, Rodney Baggins (talk) 21:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Liang has since dropped current rankings http://livescores.worldsnookerdata.com/Rankings/Index/14069 currently ranked 7th Chinese 1) Ding (9) 2) Yan (22) 3) Xiao (23) 4) Lyu (31) 5) Zhou (32) 6) Li Hang (33) 7) Liang (37) 8) Yuan 9) Zhao 10) Lu Ning (talk QueenAlexandria 21:55, 2 Apr 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I think the problem is that we clearly have a relative time statement in the lead section. See MOS:RELTIME: "currently" is a word to watch because it goes out of date and relies on editors to keep updating it. Equivalent articles for Ding, Yan and Xiao don't have this information, at least not in the lead. So I suggest the solution is to remove the statement, or replace it with something more relevant. According to Snooker world rankings 2016/2017, he was world number 11 at the end of the 2016/2017 season, and China's number 2 player (after Ding) at that point, so that is more notable. The lead could contain a statement like "he was ranked as China's number 2 player at the end of 2016/2017" (or something similar), or just put it at the end of his 2016/2017 section? Also noticed he has no 2017/2018 section, so that's another problem/omission! Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:04, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recent conviction in lede

Is his recent conviction appropriate for the lede? It makes up a few lines in the article but half the lede. WP:LEDE does mention "including any prominent controversies" but also add a note: "Do not violate WP:Neutral point of view by giving undue attention to less important controversies in the lead section." Nigej (talk) 15:42, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I must say I agree it's not lede material, other than a mention about him being suspended. It's almost saying this person is a convict, and has a snooker career, maybe? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:45, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this thread (better late than never). I think Nigej is correct about too much detail. I edited the lead accordingly, giving one sentence to Liang's four-month suspension for domestic assault and another sentence to his current suspension amid a match-fixing investigation. I don't believe this is "undue attention" given the level of press coverage around these incidents. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 13:33, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. We should mention long scale suspensions in the lede - it is relevant to the person, especially two like this. However, it shouldn't be overplayed. It's not career defining. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It would be more career-defining if it turned into a lengthy ban from the sport. We'll have to wait and see how things turn out for Liang... HurricaneHiggins (talk) 17:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Unsuccessful. Arconning (talk) Arconning (talk) 06:48, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Liang Wenbo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 21:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Arconning (talk · contribs) 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this, comments will probably be finished in the next 72 hours! Arconning (talk) 15:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Vilenski Here are my comments, hope they can be addressed! Just a few and I think we're ready to go.

Prose and MoS

Optional. Change mentions of quarter-final/quarter-finals to quarterfinal/quarterfinals and similar words, but both are accepted spellings of the word.
- Not according to WP:CUEMOS. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

Remove the reference in the lead as it's already mentioned in the body. After a second read it's more of a "kinda" mention so you could either let it be or mention it in the body.
- Done. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Medals are formatted with the golds at the top for each competition. For the "Asian Games" section it would be top to bottom, 2006 Doha Gold, 2010 Guangzhou Gold, 2006 Doha Silver.
- I was under the impression that we did it by event type, rather than by medal. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early career

Mention ranking in team event. "At the 2006 Asian Games, Liang won the silver medal in the singles event, losing 2–4 in the final to Ding Junhui, and competed in the Chinese team at the event alongside Ding and Tian Pengfei."
- Sure. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Becoming a top 64-player

No issues. Pass.

First ranking event final

Liang qualified for the 2009 Grand Prix (snooker), make it show 2009 Grand Prix.
- WhoopsLee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English Masters champion and UK Championship finalist

Is thrashed a proper word here? Don't know much about snooker terminology.
- Yeah, I hate it when people put that stuff out. I've removed.Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final playing years

Dominic Dale, David Grace, Eden Sharav, and Li Hang, add a comma at the end.
- Done Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Domestic assault conviction and suspension

Sheffield city centre, capitalize city and centre and wikilink to Sheffield City Centre.
I mean, the source itself doesn't do this, and we don't really know if it's talking about the administrative part (the capitalised part), or simply being near the center of the city. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Match-fixing investigation and permanent ban from snooker

No issues.

Personal life

coronavirus outbreak in China., wikilink to COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China.

Performance and rankings timeline & Career finals

Everything seems well formatted.

Images

Both images have proper licenses and are relevant to the article.

Refs

Reference 137 uses IMDb which isn't a reliable source per Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Either change the reference or remove the claim in "Personal life" entirely.
Add the publisher of the sources in sources that don't have them listed. Reference 7, 12 to 18, 40 to 42, 70,
What is reference 70 referencing to? "Liang Wenbo 2012/2013, Snooker.org."
Could also add some dates on reference 39 and 114.
Reference 140 says BBc rather than BBC.
Reference 153, "(Chinese (China) sina." Fix.
- I've done all these. Not sure why the last one was missing a bracket. Fixed now anyway. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misc

No ongoing edit war, pretty focused and broad information about the topic at hand, neutral :P.

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

Status query

Arconning, Lee Vilenski, where does this review stand? As far as I can tell, the last post here was the day after the review was opened, over six weeks ago, and no edits have yet been made to address any of the issues raised. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh gosh thanks for reminding me, can't believe I've forgotten about this. Arconning (talk) 06:45, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.