Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Snooker world rankings 2018/2019/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 16 May 2022 (UTC) [1].

---

Snooker world rankings 2018/2019

2019 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/Snooker world rankings 2018/2019/archive1

Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it follows the same layout as current FL Snooker world rankings 2019/2020. Welcome your comments to this article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:31, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need captions, which allow screen reader software to jump straight to named tables without having to read out all of the text before it each time. Visual captions can be added by putting |+ caption_text as the first line of the table code; if that caption would duplicate a nearby section header, you can make it screen-reader-only by putting |+ {{sronly|caption_text}} instead. "Seeding list" and "Ranking points" are missing this.
• Tables need column scopes for all column header cells, which in combination with row scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Column scopes can be added by adding !scope=col to each header cell, e.g. | Party becomes !scope=col | Party. If the cell spans multiple columns, then use Example text instead. "Revision dates" has 'column' instead of 'col', while the other two tables have a different problem- when you have 2-layer column headers like that, both layers should bother have scopes so that screen readers read out e.g. "Season 18/19" as a prefix rather than just "18/19". Though, actually, why is it "17/18 Season" as a single cell, but "Season" and "18/19" as separate ones? Should be just one or the other.
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 17:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Thanks for these. i have made the changes. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:59, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Comments from ChrisTheDude

• Don't think you need the "main" template at the top given that it's linked in the lead
• "Start ranking released by World Snooker doesn't match" => "Start ranking released by World Snooker does not match"
• Think that's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 23:17, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

No issues, resolved ChrisTheDude Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

AK

• Disclaimer: I haven't checked references and will be claiming credit at the Wikicup.
• "Certain tournaments were given" → Shouldn't this be "are given"?
  • Hmm, I think the reason for this is that it is future proof. Ranking status can change, with some events which were once non-ranking becoming ranking, and vise versa. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
• Footnote 13 needs a reference.
  • I went ahead and removed it. Seems a bit irrelevant to me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
• I've mainly just glanced over the tables since they're so large.
• That's all. AryKun (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support. All my concerns have been resolved. AryKun (talk) 16:03, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Dank

• Standard disclaimer: I don't know what I'm doing, and I mostly AGF on sourcing.
• Refs 4 and 8 are missing retrieval dates.
• Checking the FLC criteria:
• 1. I've done very minor copyediting; feel free to revert or discuss. The table coding seems fine. Normally I eyeball the sort orders in the table columns, but the ones here are almost all numbers (which are probaby going to sort correctly), and there are a lot of them. I sampled the links in the tables.
• 2. The lead meets WP:LEAD and defines the inclusion criteria.
• 3a. The list has comprehensive items and annotations.
• 3b. The article is well-sourced to reliable sources, and the UPSD tool isn't indicating any actual problems (but this isn't a source review). Except as noted above, all relevant retrieval (or archive) dates are present.
• 3c. The list meets requirements as a stand-alone list, it isn't a content fork, it doesn't largely duplicate another article (that I can find), and it wouldn't fit easily inside another article.
• 4. It is navigable.
• 5. It meets style requirements. At a glance, the images seem fine.
• 6. It is stable.
• Close enough for a support. Well done. - Dank (push to talk) 04:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Comments from BennyOnTheLoose

• "The events that made up the 1976–77 snooker season were the first to award players with ranking points" - as per my comment at the Snooker world rankings 2020/2021 review, this isn't correct. 1976 World Championship was before that season, as an example.
  • Done Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
• Suggest wikilining "Seeding" in "Seedings for each event were..."
  • Linked. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
• Note 12: "Start ranking released by World Snooker does not match with the points at the end of last season." - is there a source for this? Is it known why?
  • Not really. I suppose this might be OR? Happy to remove. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}
    • I think it's helpful to keep the note. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
• Ref 4 is incomplete.
  • Fixed Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
• Ref 8 produces a "CS1 maint: url-status (link)"
  • IABot has fixed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
• I think that World Snooker refs should have World Snooker as the publisher, rather than WPBSA. (WPBSA is only the second largest shareholder in World Snooker's ownership company, behind Matchroom Sport, as mentioned here).
  • Still pending. Yhe other responses are fine and I can't see any other issues. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
• Some of the linked sources aren't archived. I suggest running IABot.
  • Done Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Poke. --PresN 15:20, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, Benny reminded me earlier today. I've left some responses. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Support. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

PresN - looks like Benny is happy with sources, text and images. Do I need anything else on this nomination? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Source review from BennyOnTheLoose

• This is the sort of topic that attracts little detailed coverage in independent sources. I consider that range of sources is suitable and that they are reliable. Hendon's blogspot source meets SELFPUB criteria, IMO.
• As per my comments above, World Snooker refs should be attributed to that organisation rather than to the WPBSA.
• Sources:[6][7] - shouldn't the references be against "Revision dates"?
  • I'm pretty sure either is acceptable.Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
• "- snooker.org" should be removed from the title of the "snoo_Hist" ref.
• I checked a couple of table entries against sources and found no issues.
  • Can't see any other issues. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
    • I think I've covered all of these. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
      • Pass for source review. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Image review from BennyOnTheLoose

• The picture of O'Sullivan is larger than the one of Selby. I think it could be cropped to match without affecting the usefulness of the image.
  • I had a look in MOS:IMAGES and I couldn't see that this is in breach of anything there, so take the comment as optional. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

For the record:

• The brief alt texts seem to be in line with WP:MOSALT
• Images have CC licenses.
• Images date from close to 2018/2019 that I don't think any "(pictured in...)" addtions to the captions are necessary.
• Caption and placement OK.
• Suitable number of images for the article, and IMO the two most appropriate players to include.
  • Can't see anything else. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
    • Pass for image review. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:09, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

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