Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2014 World Snooker Championship/archive1

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

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13 August 2021 [1].

2014 World Snooker Championship[edit]

Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:01, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 2014 edition of the World Snooker Championship. Really good event this one. Let me know what you think :) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:01, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

  • File:Logo Snooker-WM 2014.jpg is well above threshold of originality
  • Otherwise the licensing looks OK
  • Other images should be clearly labeled as not being taken at this particular competition (t · c) buidhe 23:17, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've gone through the article and added alt and labelling the years and such. I have removed the offending image. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:17, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from TRM[edit]

  • I got a whole heap of duplicate links, rather than list them all here, perhaps better for you to use the tool to identify and resolve them all.
  • "Neil Robertson compiled.." link 'im.
  • "Mark Selby won the event to capture..." mildly confusing as your previously mentioned "event" was the previous year's world championship...
  • ""tournament, a 140 and" comma after 140.
  • " A qualifying tournament..." feels like this ought to go in chronological order in the lead.
  • Lead feels a touch light, perhaps include how those not going through the qualifying tournament made it in there?
  • "The World Snooker Championship features 32 professional players..." should have noticed this before, perhaps it's worth clarifying that this was the rule in effect at the time of this particular tournament, as I imagine previous tournaments (and who knows, perhaps future tournaments) won't be in the same format.
  • "As of 2020 Stephen Hendry is the" comma after 2020 and presumably we can now make that 2021?
  • "the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association." as you use WPBSA in the infobox, I would add the initialism here.
  • "was held at the Crucible Theatre, first held..." held.. held repetitive.
  • "ranking event of" events.
  • "sponsored by sports betting company Dafabet" you said in the lead it was the first time so that should be covered and expanded upon in the body, e.g. who previously sponsored it and for how long?
  • "Six-time champion Steve Davis..." caption is a complete sentence so use a full stop, and check the others.
  • "a match he needed to win " who?
  • Six-times vs six-time vs two-time... consistency.
  • "play at the event" main event?
  • "failed to play at the event for the first time since ... failed to play at the event for the first time since..." repetitive.
  • "Six-time runner-up Jimmy White" as you already said "runner-up" could you say "finalist" or something different here?
  • "1997 champion" no link?
  • "O'Sullivan defeated Hull 10–4." merge this tiny sentence into the previous one.
  • "and later 10–2" well, he won 10–2...
  • "a record number he jointly" no need for number.
  • "North Anston" wouldn't "Rotherham" (linked) make more sense for our global audience?
  • "best-of-25 frames matches" -> "best-of-25-frame matches"
  • "Ronnie O'Sullivan trailed..." no need for Ronnie unless there are two O'Sullivans.
  • Indeed, what's the strategy on repeating first names here?
  • "won frame 20 by" maybe "won the 20th frame by" to avoid mixing frame numbers and frame scores.

That takes me to "Quarter-finals", hopefully some of this is useful. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "best-of-25 frames matches" -> "best-of-25-frames matches" (the "best-of-25-frames" is the adjective...) and apply similar throughout.
  • "due to the length..." I guess you mean due to slow play?
    • You could say that, but the sources don't say that. There's a few different reasons why a session might run long. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Mark Selby and Alan McManus.." Selby gets mentioned four times in three sentences which is a little jarring.
  • I wouldn't split the Dale/Hawkins QF across paras.
  • "O'Sullivan lead at 10–2," -> "O'Sullivan led 10–2,"
  • General: while there's no doubt the factual material here is on point, I wonder if there's any critical commentary that can be drawn in, e.g. did anyone do particularly well, badly, surprisingly? Was there any bad behaviour? Any criticisms of playing surfaces, conditions, tables, refereeing? Any reactions from outside the two finalists?
    • So, there is *sometimes* comments about the tables and how they play, but they are generally kept on the downlow. Nowadays the cloth is very, very good, and rarely has issues (although this years there was a little bit of commentary about this). Nothing from the 2014 event that I could find. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Brendan Moore.[98][99]" no full stop.
  • That table is odd, repeating the frame scores on both sides and just bolding alternatively. Why do we need to do that in a two-player match, isn't it obvious that one score was O'Sullivan's and the other was Selby's?
  • Alfie Burden appears to be piped to a redirect back to itself.
  • "100 Neil Robertson..." etc, I think a colon would be useful after each list of centuries.
  • Check refs for sources in titles, e.g. ref 12.
  • What's the strategy on publisher/work linking? I see multiple ESPN linked, but things like Bleacher Report (which isn't italicised in our article) and The Guardian not linked every time.

That's it for now. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support for prose from Shooterwalker[edit]

Going to take a shot at the prose. I don't have a lot of familiarity with snooker championships, but I can for sure comment on the grammar and readability. Expect more comments soon. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Working through my comments now. Feel free to push back on any of these. If I'm asking, it's because you may have a good reason for something being the way it is, and you can use judgment to decide where changes are appropriate.
Lead
  • The first sentence is always really important, so you can explain what it is to the reader and not confuse or lose them. I'd ask if you really need to bring in the other title, let alone explain that the alternate title is driven by sponsorship.
  • "Crucible and the tournament was..." -> "Crucible. The tournament was also..." (break into two sentences for readability, rather than two fragments joined by "and")
  • Otherwise looks pretty good.
Background
  • "The 32 players for the event" -> "The 32 players" or "These 32 players" (you already established that these are 32 players for the event)
  • Is it that important to know where the first championship took place, let alone who won?
    • I think it's relevant to get across that this isn't a championship that took place once. This is almost 90 years of play - so a bit of colour stating what happened in the first event is suitable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it perhaps more relevant to know where things stood in 2014, rather than where things stand now in 2021? Some of these details are more important for the broader World Snooker Championship, where I'd expect this to focus more on a historic moment in 2014.
    • I get what you mean - thing is Hendry has won the event the most times since the 1990s, so I generally just use an up to date source. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Related, there is an irregular mix of tense here. It being a past event, you might just want to use "was" in most instances.
  • It feels like there might be some redundancy between the format subsection and the prior section – the location, it being in use since 1977, the number of participants. I actually like how it's written in this section better, and it's more clear.
  • "The total prize money for the 2014 World Snooker Championship was raised to £1,214,000 from the previous year's £1,111,000." -> "The total prize money for the 2014 World Snooker Championship was £1,214,000, a raise from the previous year's £1,111,000."
First round
  • "The first round was played as best-of-19-frames" -> "The first round was played as a best-of-19-frames over" (this seems more grammatical, but ignore me if this is more of a term of the game)
    • Should have been "as best-of-19 frame matches, held over two sessions". Else, "as the best-of-19-frames". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:02, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In his first round match he was defeated 9–10 by debutant Michael Wasley and so failed to set a new record for tournament wins in a season" -> perhaps a comma to organize this a bit.
Second round
  • "as best-of-25-frames" or "as a best-of-25-frames"? Likewise for the first sentence in the next two subsections.
  • "throughout both of the first two sessions" -> feels a little redundant. "throughout the first two sessions" would suffice
  • "McManus played Doherty and won six frames in a row from 4–3 ahead to lead 10–3 and later won 13–8" -> probably needs a comma
Quarter-finals
  • "completed seven of the scheduled eight frames in the first session of their match due to the length" -> is this a common thing? did they run out of time?
    • Yeah, it's not uncommon, but reasonably rare. Matches are generally played starting at 10 AM, 2 PM and 6 PM. If you overrun, you might not finish. The big deal is that then your later sessions need to be even longer. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "take the led 12–11," -> "take the lead 12–11,"
Semi-finals
  • "O'Sullivan lead at 10–2," -> "O'Sullivan led at 10–2," (a reverse of the last lead/led issue)
  • "O'Sullivan himself last achieved this feat in 2004 when he defeated Anthony Hamilton 13–3 in the quarter-finals and Stephen Hendry 17–4 in the semi-finals.[78] That year, O'Sullivan won the championship one frame into the final session.[79]" -> this feels like a tangent, and might be summed up in one sentence with less detail
  • "Selby had previously reached the final in 2007, when he lost to John Higgins.[82]" -> similar thing that breaks the flow. Could be as simple as rephrasing to ", his first time reaching the final since 2007." It helps keep the reader grounded in 2014, instead of jumping all around.
Final
  • "This was the first time that Moore had presided over a World Championship final.[85] In the first session on Sunday afternoon, O'Sullivan took a 5–3 lead, which he extended in the evening session to 8–3 and 10–5, before Selby took the last two frames of the day to leave O'Sullivan with a 10–7 overnight lead." -> this might work better as two shorter sentences
  • "I want to congratulate Mark on a fantastic tournament. He's been the best player over 17 days, that was tough he had me in all sorts of trouble. In the end I was numb as he was too strong and tough" -> this isn't totally grammatical, and might need a comma. You could also shorten it to focus on what you feel is the important part.
  • The rest of it looks generally good. Some minor grammatical issues but this is within striking distance of featured quality prose. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:45, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look at this Shooterwalker! All seems reasonable, bar for a couple of points I'll address. Give me a day or two and I'll have this done Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:56, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have addressed/changed all of the above Shooterwalker. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Very close now. A few lingering comments:
        • Now that you've gone with the construction "the best-of-X-frames", you should change the other instances. (Usually the opening sentence in each sub-section).
        • "Selby and McManus only completed seven of the scheduled eight frames in the first session of their match due to the length" -> your explanation on this review page made more sense to me than this did in the article, and it's probably because "length" is ambiguous as a measure of space/distance. It took me a little bit to understand what you meant, and I'd make it clear you mean time. For example "of their match due to running of out of time", or even better, "of their match as they ran out of time".
        • Watch for other reviewers who have an opinion on some of the background section. I do feel like what happened in 2021 is a tangent, but if I'm the only one, then it's nothing I would insist on changing.
      • With those, the prose will be in excellent shape and very readable. Shooterwalker (talk) 12:18, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, cool. I've covered those two points. Happy to keep it open, but bare in mind we currently have 7 other World Snooker Championship articles at FA with similar background. Happy to get a consensus though :). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree and it's probably best to wait for other reviewers. I fixed a typo for you, and otherwise it looks great. Happy to support. Shooterwalker (talk) 13:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - BennyOnTheLoose[edit]

Source Review

  • Reliability - sources all look OK. Quite a few WPBSA (therefore non-independent) sources but these are used for supporting non-controversial information.
  • 11 - missing publication date
  • 12 - missing publication date
  • 29 - missing author
  • 32 - missing author
  • 33 - missing publication date
  • 34 - "Hull"?
  • 38 - missing publication date
  • 39 - missing publication date
  • 42 - missing website
  • 46 - move reference to after "set in 2009" (so that "Crucible record" is supported)
  • 49 - "|author=WalesOnline" should be removed; "|work=walesonline" is there
  • 51 - missing publication date
  • 56 - missing author
  • 59 - add "agency=Press Association"
  • 63 - missing publication date
  • 64 - add "agency=Press Association"
  • 66 - add "location=Glasgow"
  • 73 - add "agency=Press Association"
  • 87 - archive.org link redirects to the live page for me; the live page doesn't verify the info.
  • 88 - mising author
  • 90 - mising author
  • snooker.org - one of the four has an author. Make consistent.
  • snooker.org - looks like source is in English, not Norwegian.
  • "Stephen Hendry is the event's most successful participant in the modern era, having won the championship seven times" - source doesn't quite state this. It has seven wins for Hendry as the record, but not the "modern era" mention.
  • " replacing previous sponsors Betfair" - not verified by source used.
  • Main draw: Are all three sources quoted needed for "Below are the full results from the event"?
    • They all cover the draw - don't see an issue by putting citing this more than once. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:20, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

  • Typo "tournamnet" in lead
  • Background: "who had won the 2013 event to win" - change either won or win to avoid repetition.
  • Qualifying stage centuries: "The highest was a 139 by both" - I suggest removing "a" or using alternate wording.
    • Covered these three points - most of the source stuff seems easy enough, I'll work my way through when I'm next on PC.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:59, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • snooker.org citations still inconsistent in terms of lower/mixed case and italicisation.
  • "Snooker World Championship 2014: 'The Rocket' Ronnie O'Sullivan holds" - incomplete title.
Hi Benny, from an abundance of caution, can I just check that this is a general support as well as a source review pass? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gog the Mild, yes, I'm satisfied that the FA criteria are met. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:13, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for the coordinators[edit]

Hi Gog the Mild, I usually wait until I have three prose and both source and image reviews done before requesting, but as everything above seems unanimous, would you be ok with me firing up another nomination? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:46, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You do have three prose and both source and image reviews. That's what I was querying BotL about. So on that basis, sure, go ahead. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:12, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Z1720[edit]

Non-expert review, although if I keep reading these snooker articles I might become one...

    • Feel free to become an expert! :P. If you would like to know more, let me know Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • You'll have to send me a YouTube clip of an exciting Snooker match one day. Z1720 (talk) 15:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "(also referred to as the 2014 Dafabet World Snooker Championship for the purposes of sponsorship)" while the sponsorship is mentioned in the article's body, the alternate name is not, meaning this statement is uncited atm. Suggest adding its official name in the body of the article.
    • I've gone ahead and just cited in the lede, as it's rarely suitable for the body. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "having won the previous year's event by defeating Barry Hawkins in the final." I could not find this information in the body of the article.
  • "This was Selby's fourth ranking title, also completing the Triple Crown of World Championship, UK Championship, and Masters titles" I could not find this information in the body
  • "with the final held at Camkin's Hall in Birmingham, England," Might have to wikilink Birmingham, as I'm not sure how well-known this city is outside the UK.
  • "Defending champion Ronnie O'Sullivan drew world number 122 Robin Hull in the first round," His status as defending champion was already mentioned in the Background section, so this seems redundant.
    • I mean, sure, but this is more to explain why he is being referred to first in the list of matches. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During the first round, the second "Ladies' Day" at the tournament featured events designed to encourage greater female participation in the sport." Is this the second Ladies Day of the 2014 tournament, or was there a Ladies Days in a previous year and this is the second year that there has been a Ladies Day? Please clarify in the article.

Those are my comments. Please ping when the above are addressed. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 02:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    • Thanks for picking this up Z1720, I have made the above changes. :) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • My concerns have been addressed. I can support. Z1720 (talk) 15:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/2014_World_Snooker_Championship/archive1&oldid=1038669363"