Talk:List of world eight-ball champions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Split proposal (withdrawn)[edit]

Resolved
 – Nomination withdrawn in favor of newer idea.

A lot of work has already been done to split Eight-ball and Blackball (pool), as the games are only marginally related to each other; I don't think it helps much to re-confuse the matter here. The UK-style game's champions should be at List of World Blackball Champions, with disambiguation tags at the top of both articles just like at both parent articles. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 00:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I thought of that, but wanted to show the continuity from the last EUKPF championship in 2005 to the first blackball champs in 2006. You are welcome to split it but could you reference the continuity? As an aside, do you have resources (perhaps pool magazines) that can fill the table gaps? I've scoured the net but I can't find references especially of the PPPO champs in the 90's and before. Ross McInnes profiles (for example) have mentioned him being 4 times eight-ball world champion, but there is no information as to what years or under which organization (PPPO?) this was. Sandman30s 22:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I would definitely include the EUKPF stuff in the blackball version. Good job so far, BTW. Sadly my US-based pool mags don't cover blackball/UK-style eight-ball, just US-style WPA/IPT game. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 00:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have proposed a different tactic instead, below, namely to genericize the article further to include all pool world champions, since the split articles will be too short. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Requested move[edit]

Resolved
 – No consensus after over a year and after an expired WP:RM filing and discussion period (to rename article to lower-case "champion").
See end of thread; this is straightforward. PS: The actual controversy is the move to List of World Eight-ball champions which is gibberish and violates the naming conventions. That move is disputed by me and at least one other party below, so returning it to the long-stable article name is the proper action under WP:BRD and WP:CONSENSUS, pending a new consensus to change the article name. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion copied from User talk:Fram#Huh?[edit]

  • I don't understand why you moved List of World Eight-ball Champions to List of World Eight-ball champions, which violates the article naming conventions. "World Eight-ball Champion" is a professional title, and thus a capitalized proper noun. "World Eight-ball" doesn't mean anything at all by itself, and certainly isn't a capitalized proper name. If "World Eight-ball Champion" were not such a title, but something Wikipedians made up as a descriptive term, the article would be List of world eight-ball champions. I'm having WP:RM put the article back where it was, since you or someone else edited the redirect left by the move, and this is blocking a non-administrative move back to the original title. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Winners of the World Eight-ball Championships are World Eight-ball champions. Spelled differently, some newspapers at least agree with me[7][8][9][10]. As for the editing of the redirect, I haven't checked it in this case, but that is usually that annoying bot that adds "redirect from alternative capitalization" or something similar. Champion is not a proper noun but a description. I notice that you made this move a year before as well, and that it has been made now again. I'll post it at requested moves. Fram (talk) 04:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um, no, that's completely nonsensical. "World Eight-ball" doesn't mean anything at all. There's no such thing as "World Eight-ball" (or world eight-ball for that matter). I think you are misparsing the construction as "champions of world eight-ball", when the meaning is "world champions of eight-ball". Regardless, professional titles of this sort are proper nouns. I also reverted your de-capitalization of the titles of published rule-sets. Publication titles are capitalized, whether they are novels, history books, comic books, movies, TV shows, or rules booklets. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continued[edit]

  • Is "World Eight-ball" a valid proper-name? Do we move this page to List of World Eight-ball champions or List of world eight-ball champions? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Or any of the myriad other possible names: is it World 8-Ball or World Eight-Ball or World Eight Ball or any of these with "Pool" added to the end? Anyway, "World 8-Ball" is often used like that, as can be seen here("the World 8-Ball titles"). Other articles use "world champion"[11][12][13]. In addition to the "World Eight Ball champion" sources (newspapers, not some random websites), there is e.g. also this[14], or the People's Daily[15] and the BBC as well[16]. Sport sites use all kinds of different capitalizations, with e.g. Pool & Billiard Magazine supporting "World 8-Ball champion"[17].
    • So while you can find all kinds of capitalization, it looks to me that most newspapers and other reliable news media use "champion", not "Champion", no matter how they write the rest of the title (although there are clearly more sources for 8-Ball than for Eight-ball). Fram (talk) 06:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Press sources in a case like this are useless, as they have no consistency. Even the billiards press is not consistent on things like this! Amazing but true. Such a situation of random chaos and wildly diverging personal preference is not tenable in Wikipedia, as is clearly laid out at WP:CUESPELL. One of the most key points of WP:MOS as a whole is consistency. WP needs to be consistent, and logical and useful in its role; external style guides and common usage do not always agree with MOS and topical style guidelines here, because WP's needs are specialized and particular, and WP style guides are not trying to tell the world how to write, but rather guiding WP editors in writing WP articles for maximum consistency, disambiguation and ease of reader comprehension. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That depends on what Wikipedia practice is on capitals in nouns that mean a game. People who want to promote something (which includes some who write matter for newspapers) sometimes capitalize a word to make it look more important, whether or not it is a valid proper name. (Mad (magazine) once satirized this tendency: the same meal was a Roast Beef Dinner when trumpeted in an advertisement as an extra in a flight ticket offer, and a roast beef dinner when the advertisement was described unfavorably.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:SPORTS has not produced a naming convention or style guideline yet, but WP:CUESPORTS has, and it covers this stuff: WP:CUESPELL. I haven't yet tagged it with {{Guideline}} but it has been stable for something like 2 years, and almost all of the cue sports articles are consistent with it (i.e. it has in fact been acting as a guideline in practice for a long time). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, I know, that's one of the reasons I prefer not to capitalize (not to be negative, but to be neutral). But when there is a debate about it, I try to check what major sources do in this case.Fram (talk) 09:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There was no "debate" about it until someone came in here and started de-capitalizing everything right and left. The usage is quite stable across sports articles, not just pool ones. "Champion" is not a proper noun when used by itself ("Smith is a champion pool player"), but is part of a proper noun when an officially conferred/earned full title is used ("Smith is the 2009 World Nine-ball Champion", or more specifically "Smith was the 2009 Men's Division World Nine-Ball Champion", etc.) Analogy: "Jones won a 2009 Academy Award, for Best Supporting Actress" vs. "Jones is the best supporting actress I've ever seen". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moot point - we don't capitalize non-trademarked game names (except within phrases that are proper nouns, like book titles, organization names, world champion titles, etc.) on Wikipedia, by overwhelming consensus (chess, basketball, carom billiards, jai alai, etc., etc., are not proper nouns). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • What is the chance that all newspapers, TV stations and so on who have no stake in the game (not sponsoring it, not having exclusive rights to it, ...) would be actively promoting it? And anyway, is that directly relevant to this debate? If we can't take into account what spelling reliable sources use for anything, then what guideline do we have left? The WP:NAME#Lowercase clearly states: "Do not capitalize second and subsequent words unless the title is almost always capitalized in English". I have shown above that the title is not "almost always" capitalized in English, so the conclusion seems quite clear... Fram (talk) 13:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • So move it back. It is clear that someone did not understand Wikipedia convention to not capitalize all words in a title, and champion is clearly not a proper noun. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That would be editwarring. "Champion" by itself is of course not a proper noun. "World Eight-ball Champion" is a proper-noun phrase, like "President of the United States" (president by itself is not a proper noun).— SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "World Eight-ball Champion" as a title is a proper noun, thus capitalized. "World Standardised Rules" is the title of a published work, the WPA's ruleset, thus capitalized. Please ask on talk page before undoing a consistent scheme of capitalization in an article. If it is consistent, there was probably a reason for it. :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 03:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It may partly depend on whether capitalizing changes the meaning. World Standardised Rules is a book which describes the game's world standardised rules. Jersey is an island; a jersey is a type of knitted garment. Compare the process of a tradename losing its capital letter and becoming generic. Not merely capitalizing a word to make it look more important. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of course. That isn't happening here. The World Standardised Rules is a specific document by that title (and the rules encompassed by it), namely that of the WPA; "world standardised rules", lower case, is completely ambiguous and could refer to any number of rule sets, such as those produced by WEPF, BAPTO, etc., since they are rule, they are international and are standardised in various senses. The WPA WSR is a proper noun. Compare "BCA rules", which is not a proper noun (because that is not their actual title/name, but simply a way to refer to them; their proper name is "Tournament Pocket Billiards Games: Eight Ball"). I should probably update WP:CUESPELL to account for this stuff. Done, actually. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Part of the confusion here is that this article was intended to be a list of WPA World Eight-ball Champions (an official sporting title), in the game of eight-ball, but since then has been edited to include material that pertains to "eight-ball pool" and its world-standardised variant blackball, which is actually a related but very different game. Last I looked, this article was already tagged for splitting. Someone needs to source what the actual world champion titles are for champs from those other organisations' world championships, as they may be something completely different (though by no means should the split be held up for that). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SmcCandlish, you're replies are so fragmented that I won't bother answering in all these places. Let me just say that WP:CUESPELL did not mention the naming of champions in the last stable version, which existed from december 2007 until August 2008. You have since added (on the 29th, i.e. today) a naming convention for champions and so on. Your statement that "I haven't yet tagged it with Template:Guideline (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) but it has been stable for something like 2 years" is very, very disingeneous, and makes me not inclined to discuss it any further with you. Adding stuff to an essay to support your position, and then claiming that it is a stable almost-guideline for almost two years... Fram (talk) 07:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I announced the fact that I was updating it, right here; there is nothing "disingenuous" (please see word definition) about that, and it won't affect this debate at all, since it isn't a guideline (yet), and I made it obvious I was basing the new text on this debate in the first place (I even said so in edit summary). Sheesh. If you have a substantive disagreement with the wording at the essay, please be aware that it has a talk page for discussion of its wording (I have since added a section for discussion of the recent addition). WP:BOLD is policy; I do not need your or anyone else's permission to go edit an essay page to make better sense. If someone disagrees with the sensibility of the edit, they are free to revert me and we can talk about it at its talk page. (WP:BRD as usual).
Thank you for not responding everywhere. I added my comments at the places where they seemed relevant, but in retrospective this was probably a poor idea, as the entire discussion has been too fragmentary. There is no reason for a consensus debate this short and simple to already be in three subsections! What a mess. Re-focusing here at the end of the debate (as I suggested way up above with "see end of thread") is probably a good idea. What issues did you want to raise with my sprinkled responses? — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know the "word definition" of disingeneous, thank you. It describes exactly what I meant. Let's see: "WP:SPORTS has not produced a naming convention or style guideline yet, but WP:CUESPORTS has, and it covers this stuff: WP:CUESPELL. I haven't yet tagged it with Guideline but it has been stable for something like 2 years, and almost all of the cue sports articles are consistent with it (i.e. it has in fact been acting as a guideline in practice for a long time).". The essay did not cover this stuff, and could not be acting as a guideline wrt this. Now you want to make it a guideline while at the same time adding completely new sections. You did indicate that you updated the essay, but in a completely different section of your fragmented response, thereby making this section appear much stronger and important than it actually was.
You claim that the new title was "gibberish" ("completely nonsensical" as well, even though a lot of reliable sources use the same capitalization. You claim that it violates the naming conventions, but only if you start from the position that it is a proper noun, which it isn't. When in doubt, it should not be capitalized: not capitalized is the default on Wikipedia (consistency, you know?). Of course, dismissing the basic position of our capitalization guidelines as a "red herring" is the easy way out. Even in the last 12 hours, another instance of "World 8-ball champion" has appeared in a reliable source[18]. Too bad that all these newspapers are using completely nonsensical capitalization rules.
You also claimed that "I also reverted your de-capitalization of the titles of published rule-sets." Which ones would that be? I can't remember moving any of those, and I can't find them in your move log. Fram (talk) 19:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved my response to this to your talk page, as continued back-and-forth over this is not productive on this article's talk page, which exists for improvement of the article, not personal dispute resolution. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Rename and re-scope proposal[edit]

I was working on the long-tagged split of this article into List of World Eight-ball Champions and List of World Blackball Champions and it occurred to me that the material is so sparse and particular that it should simply be moved into articles on the events (though there is no World Blackball Championship article at this point). Then it occurred to me that in addition to this, readers' most likely search phrases for material like this will be "world pool champion" or "pool world champion", without specifying the game. What we really need here is a more comprehensive pool champs article, and much of this will be easily sourceable from the back of the BCA rulebook, going all the way back to around the turn of the previous century. If we can declare the above naming debate closed as "no consensus" but agree on this, then the article can simply move to World pool champions with a redir at Pool world champions, lower case since no specific title is being referenced, only a class of such titles, and everyone should be happy! PS: Since each game and sanctioning body would be in its own section, the specifics could still be easily linkable-to from eight-ball, blackball, etc. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 15:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I second a page called World Pool Champions, and the BCA book sounds intriguing; please share. Sandman30s (talk) 14:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would be a page-move of this page to the new title, and rewrite to make it more encompassing. The BCA book has twelve pages of championship results and world records in eight-ball (the US-style game, not eight-ball pool / blackball), nine-ball, and straight pool. For other games like ten-ball we'll need additional sources. I'm pretty sure the monthly magazines can be turned to for that. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can you do the move please, and incorporate List of WPA World Nine-ball champions at least? I'm not comfortable with doing this. Thanks. Sandman30s (talk) 10:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'll try to get to it soon-ish. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 02:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Case of letters in page name?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved to List of world eight-ball champions. Aervanath (talk) 15:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Yeah, "Champions" was a typo.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  19:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Terry Higginson changed to Nigel Davis[edit]

An anon made this change, which seems dubious: [19]. Needs to be verified.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  21:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Chinese eight-ball pool"?[edit]

I removed the following unsourced section, because of lack of sources, lack of notability, and lack of international scope. If this is even real, these don't appear to be world championships in a world sport, they're national events that are open to non-nationals, like pretty much everything, like the US Open, etc. At very least, we should have a properly sourced (i.e. WP:DYK-acceptable) stub at Chinese eight-ball pool (not "Chinese 8-Ball Pool", though that should redirect there, among other variant spellings; see MOS:CUE).

The section in question:
Chinese eight-ball

This section lists world champions in Chinese eight-ball pool, sanctioned by the World Pool-Billiard Association, the Chinese Billiards and Snooker Association, and usually one or more Chinese government departments. This is played in China and attracts cue-sports professionals from all over the world. It is played on a 9 foot by 4½ foot table with rounded snooker-style pockets, rails and cloth, and with 2¼ inch pool balls. It is not to be confused with Chinese eight-ball.

Date Location Winner Nationality Runner-up Nationality
2016 Yushan County, Shangrao Shi Han-Qing [1]  China Mick Hill  England
2015 Yushan County, Shangrao Darren Appleton [2][3]  England Mark Selby  England
  1. ^ http://www.azbilliards.com/news/stories/12559-clean-sweep-for-china-at-sanlig-china-billiards-world-championship/
  2. ^ http://thepoolscene.com/international-pool-and-billiards/champions-2015-chinese-8-ball-world-championships
  3. ^ http://www.azbilliards.com/news/stories/11783-2015-chinese-8-ball-world-championships-a-players-perspective/

 — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  19:32, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean 'if this is even real' - there are videos of it? I thought those are proper references as well. I only added it after a great interest was shown in my country to send players over to the big-money Chinese events, and they finally decided to have a world championships in their unique form of pool. I think a $100,000 first prize is notable, is as the calibre of the players. It certainly is an international event! Sandman1142 (talk) 09:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Youtube is user-generated content, not a reliable source. If there are reliable sources establishing the notability of "Chinese eight-ball pool", the variant should be covered in a section at Eight-ball. Adding a list here of alleged world champions of this game is jumping the gun, when the game itself has no coverage at all on Wikipedia. Taking your word for it that notability could be established, I've opened a discussion about this at Talk:Eight-ball#Chinese eight-ball pool. I'll go over the sources so far, at that venue, since we would add info about the game itself (there, or given very good sourcing, perhaps even in its own article), before we would add a list of its champions here. PS: Money being involved has nothing to do with notability. The fact that some people who are notable showed up to try to get that money doesn't relate to notability, either; notability does not transfer by osmosis. Otherwise, every single competition with a large prize fund would be automagically notable by definition.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  10:10, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of world eight-ball champions. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:37, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on List of world eight-ball champions. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:01, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_world_eight-ball_champions&oldid=1203704957"