Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2022/May

Colour code for different events on calendar seasons

I propose we need less not more colours. Senior and women's events are (professionally) NON-ranking, but within their own tours they do have their own ranking lists, so it's not entirely correct to list the senior events as "NR", like the professional non-ranking events.

My stance is: if you're not going to have a separate colour for senior events, then you shouldn't for the women's events, and vice versa, if you ARE going to separate the women's events, then you should separate the senior events.

OR:

Three colours, one for professional ranking, one for professional non-ranking, and one for all other events, seniors, women's, Q-Tour, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:3C55:C9DD:C058:71FD (talk) 12:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't really know why we have them all in one table. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Looking at the current season calendar, it looks an absolute mess. Even if we split them out, I think we'll have the same WP:POVPUSH from editors arguing over colours, which table goes first etc. or whatever the latest issue is. If we are going to have them in one table, suggest losing the colour-coding entirely. They aren't colour-coded in any of the references and we can avoid these pointless edit-wars. Andygray110 (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I totally agree in that the current season does look very messy. I think a separate list for each 'category' would suffice. On the recent seasonal pages for Everton FC (a different sport I know), the matches in various competitions are given their own section (2021–22_Everton_F.C._season) and I don't see why something similar can't be done for snooker as well.

No doubt, ranking tournaments would be the first section, then (from a personal point of view) Non-ranking tournaments, Q-Tour (plus other professional tour qualifying tournaments), WWS tournaments (seeing as there are two professional tour places available from this tour) and finally Seniors Tour. Steveflan (talk) 16:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I've always thought that a section on the main tour (ranking + non-ranking (+ minor-ranking in the old days)) followed by other sections with their own tables would be a much better way forward. Mixing them all up is just confusing IMO. Nigej (talk) 18:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

It does just make more sense to me. We aren't a calendar for people to know all of the snooker events, we document where events are being played. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Agree also, seems like a good way forward. Andygray110 (talk) 22:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

As per above discussion, I've updated the 2021-22 snooker season article. Any suggestions for improvements welcome but it already looks a lot better.Andygray110 (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I really like the look of that. The only think I can think of is that I would suggest that any category were a tour place is on offer (e.g. Women's Tour and Q-Tour) should be placed higher than those that don't provide a tour place (e.g. Seniors Tour). Thanks for your quick work on this. Steveflan (talk) 14:42, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

It looks better, but against removing colours. They can sometimes be a very useful accessibility aid. That being said, better colours should be used because some colour choices make the text non-readable if a user accesses Wikipedia using the mobile app with dark mode enabled. CitroenLover (talk) 11:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I think we need to agree on which colours to use. I've started splitting the calendar for each season and colour has already been added back in to differentiate non-ranking events from ranking events. When the calendar is split from 2010/11 - 2015/16 there will also be minor-ranking events in the World Snooker Tour calendar so might be an idea to settle on which colour to use otherwise we'll end up with the colour wars again. Not sure the colour that's currently used in those seasons is easily readable. Andygray110 (talk) 12:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

My main issue has always been that we seem to highlight the least important events, rather than the most important. At one time the seniors event used a garish bright yellow colour so that they stood out the most. We still have a situation where the non-ranking events are highlighted but the ranking event aren't. Not really sure what the solution is. Nigej (talk) 12:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I think the colours for non-ranking and the minor-ranking events used in the 2010–11_snooker_season look perfectly fine, and if we agree to go forward with the recent changes made to the 2021–22_snooker_season then we shouldn't have to worry about any other colours as each 'type' of tournament will be in their own section. Steveflan (talk) 14:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

You would think so, but there will be three different types of tournament in one section (ranking, minor-ranking, non-ranking) and no doubt we'll have the incessant bickering/changing of colours at some point. Not sure if there's a solution to that but all part of the fun :) Andygray110 (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Still seems to me that the non-ranking colour (orange) stands out much more than the plain white (ranking) or the pastel yellow (non-ranking). As I said before seems odd to be highlighting the (generally) least important events. Nigej (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

We could break the World Snooker Tour section of the calendar down into sub-sections of ranking and non-ranking (and minor-ranking for applicable years)? Would look something like this? Negates using any colours. Andygray110 (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Or perhaps use a more pastelly colour for the non-ranking events. Nigej (talk) 05:04, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

I like the look of that layout. Only point I would make is that maybe the titles for the 'non WST' sections (World Womens' Snooker, World Seniors Tour, etc) should be the same size as the 'World Snooker Tour' title. Steveflan (talk) 19:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Splitting the table into sections for non- minor- and full ranking tournaments make sense to me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Only concern I have with splitting up the table into ranking, minor-ranking and non-ranking in that way is that the content will be impossible to follow or read properly. I realise we are not a calendar, but WST does not split their calendar into chunks where the first part is ranking events and the second part is non-ranking. We should, at the very least, try to make the sections follow actual calendars for accuracy purposes. In that vein, we should be keeping ranking and non-ranking events (for the main tour only) merged in one table so people can read it more easily. I don't think there is a necessity to colour code everything: just have no background colour for ranking events and a background colour to denote non-ranking events. -- CitroenLover (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

- I have no idea why we call it a "calendar" and not just "events". I don't see how it's unreadable. I get why maybe when the season is ongoing you might want to know what the next event is, regardless of if it is a ranking or not. But after the fact, it's not really that relevant. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:42, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Ranking lists naming convention

Hi guys, per Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Snooker world rankings 2020/2021/archive1, I think it's time to discuss the naming of the season and ranking lists again. Should we have our articles consistent (so Snooker world rankings 2020–21 and 2020–21 snooker season or Snooker world rankings 2020/2021 and 2020/2021 snooker season), or are they ok as they are. I also thought potentially the 2020–21 snooker world rankings makes more sense as a title. Any thoughts? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:35, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Personally I prefer the year first and the endash. Seems to be more in line with the most common style used on Wikipedia. Nigej (talk) 13:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd be happy to start up an official RM if that's what people think. (2020–21 snooker world rankings, etc.) Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

On the subject of the ranking points, what do we want to do with Snooker world ranking points 2022/2023 going forward? The general view I got from recent discussions is that the points and the rankings are better consolidated into one article, so are we going to proceed on that basis with Snooker world rankings 2022/2023? If we are I won't bother creating the templates for Snooker world ranking points 2022/2023, but if we are going to keep the lists separate for now then I need some advance notice to create the templates. Betty Logan (talk) 19:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

It should really be one article. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)