Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2022/July
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Snooker. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Held over matches (centuries)
Hi all, we have discussed this a lot I think (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2021/October#Held over matches and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2021/December#Held over matches (again)), but could we get some clarity on how we deal with the centuries list for held over matches? The WST classifies these as being main stage (or main venue) centuries, which is what I thought we agreed on we should retain, but our articles (such as the 2022 Welsh Open) are being written the other way. Could we get a consensus? I feel at GA or FA the sourcing will get picked apart if we don't follow the sourcing. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- I suspect it was agreed here but that doesn't include some of the regular editors at articles like 2022 Welsh Open. To me, its clear that these are not "qualifying" matches, so I'd add them to the "Main stage centuries" section. I'd be happy to have a symbol there that these were "held over" matches. The related issue is that we still have a section "Qualifying" which includes the held over matches, so that needs naming at the same time to "Qualifying and held-over matches" (of whatever). Nigej (talk) 11:57, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps the held over matches should go into the main draw, and not be in the Qualifying section at all. The WST brackets include them like a round 0. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:07, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- That would indeed be possible, like the old Wild-card round (2007 Malta Cup). Nigej (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Quick ping to BenjidogFourEyes and Catb2006 regarding how to handle these. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:19, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- I agree that listing the held-over matches like the wild-card round in 2007 Malta Cup would work well. In terms of the centuries I think adding them to the "Main stage centuries" section would also work as long as there is a note or something like that saying that they were made in a held over match. BenjidogFourEyes (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- That would indeed be possible, like the old Wild-card round (2007 Malta Cup). Nigej (talk) 14:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps the held over matches should go into the main draw, and not be in the Qualifying section at all. The WST brackets include them like a round 0. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:07, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Matchroom Professional Championship and similar events
Looking at Matchroom Professional Championship, we have the main article and the 3 individual event articles with 6-8 players competing. I'm of the view that there's little prospect, or indeed interest, in turning these 3 articles into anything decent and would suggest a composite article at Matchroom Professional Championship. Events like the Scottish Masters (snooker) which went on for twenty years and had bigger fields in the later years, could be retained as they are but I would suggest that small-field invitation events that went on for less than 3 or so years could be treated as a single article. Nigej (talk) 09:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- It's more of a case of if the event is independently notable than the series. In the Matchroom events, unless anyone can find a series of news articles about the events (snooker scene/BNA) I don't think they meet GNG. I wouldn't be for removing/merging articles simply because of the amount of participants, but a lot of these events are probably pretty minor so don't need a full article. We aren't here to be a fountain of all of the results ever played. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Seems to me that, even if the individual events pass GNG (which may be true given the money and the players involved), with only 5, 6 and 7 matches played in the three years, there's only a limited amount that needs to be said about each event. WP:N says that even if a topic passes GNG "This is not a guarantee that a topic will necessarily be handled as a separate, stand-alone page. Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article." and this seems to me to a good example of that. I'd be more doubtful that events like the 1984 Costa Del Sol Classic would pass GNG, although in that case there's no obvious way of merging with anything else, except perhaps the season article. Nigej (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- I support the suggestion. These events can always be split back out into individual articles if enough details are added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:40, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Any views on what we should do about including the the 1974 Jackpot Automatics tournament in Wikipedia? It was an eight-professional invitational, and the only coverage I could find is a third of a page in Snooker Scene. It's currently included in the Career finals sections of the Alex Higgins and John Spencer articles, and gets a mention in the body of the Spencer one. The 1975 Ashton Court Country Club Event is probably equally un-notable but again is included on both pages. I might make a page for the Castle pro-ams, as at least they got some mainstream press coverage. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I support the suggestion. These events can always be split back out into individual articles if enough details are added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 00:40, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Seems to me that, even if the individual events pass GNG (which may be true given the money and the players involved), with only 5, 6 and 7 matches played in the three years, there's only a limited amount that needs to be said about each event. WP:N says that even if a topic passes GNG "This is not a guarantee that a topic will necessarily be handled as a separate, stand-alone page. Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article." and this seems to me to a good example of that. I'd be more doubtful that events like the 1984 Costa Del Sol Classic would pass GNG, although in that case there's no obvious way of merging with anything else, except perhaps the season article. Nigej (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC)