Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2020 Tour Championship/archive1

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 Ealdgyth via FACBot (talk) 6 September 2020 [1].


2020 Tour Championship[edit]

Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 16:22, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the second professional snooker event after the lockdown. The event features the best 8 players on the single season list. Stephen Maguire was indeed "on fire" after winning his first ranking event in years. Both Shaun Murphy and Maguire created new records for most century breaks in best-of-17 frames matches. Not bad, considering Magiure had not qualified to play, and only recieved a spot after Ding Junhui pulled out. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 16:22, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Coral_Tour_Championship_Logo.png: I see the URL links to this image, but where is that actually from? What site?

Nikkimaria (talk) 16:13, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Kosack[edit]

  • I'm assuming the tournament was moved from Wales to England because Wales was under a stricter lockdown? This could be worth mentioning as the venue change isn't really explained.
    • No actual information other than it being more suitable. I did hear David Hendon suggest the move was actually more for TV (due to ITV being based in London), but I have no sources suggesting either way. The big reason is because the previous event was played there, and there's an onsite hotel for the players. - [2] - not sure how I'd word that? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "were checked for Covid-19", checked reads a little oddly and overly casual for the situation. Perhaps tested?
  • Was it a one-off test for COVID or a rolling test programme like some other sports?
    • They were tested when they arrived, and then not allowed to leave! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Prize money at this stage do not count towards prize" > does not count?
  • The quarter final stage uses "best of 17 frames" while other uses include the hyphens?
  • "The first match was held between Neil Robertson and Stephen Maguire", this sentence reads a little oddly I feel. If you're using held, I would suggest "The first match held was between..." Thoughts?
  • "for Ding Junhui who could not travel to the event from China", probably worth adding why he couldn't travel from China, especially as the lead does and this doesn't.
  • "performance was the "greatest performance", a little repetitive with performance here.
  • "surpas", typo here.
  • "Trump won the next two frames, and led 5–3 after the first session.[20] Trump won the first three frames", two successive sentences beginning with Trump. As the subject doesn't change, you could drop the second for "He".
  • There appears to be some variation in the use of digits or words when listing frame numbers under ten. For example, both frame 8 and frame eight and frame 9 and frame nine are used. Is there a reason for the difference?
  • "final quarter-final", the double use of final is a little jarring. Perhaps last quarter-final?
    • Agreed 11:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
  • "three-time world champion Mark Selby", it seems a little strange to include the three-time world champion part when he's already been mentioned in the previous round. I would of thought this would be better placed at his first entry into the competition?
    • Hmm, I usually add these for colour. But I've removed this instance. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A few points I picked up from a run through. Nothing particularly troublesome, this is a nice article overall. Kosack (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by WA8MTWAYC[edit]

Great article, Lee. I've some points.

  • "...no spectators would be permitted at the event when it took place." "when it took place" can be removed.
  • "Maguire won the final, 10–6 to..." the comma can be dropped.
  • "...penultimate ranking event of the 2019–20 snooker season and..." link ranking.
  • Frames is overlinked in "...as the best-of-17 frames.".
  • As is sessions in "...two sessions in the same..."
  • Better to link break in "...prize for the highest break." instead of in "...Robertson made breaks of 100...".
    • As it's part of the columns, I've linked as well, rather than replace. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:53, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Maguire lead 2–1..." lead > led.
  • I also noted that the Eurosport refs miss their article dates.

Source Review - BennyOnTheLoose[edit]

  • 0. Infobox and Lead
  • "Organised by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association," - reword as per amendment in article body. (I think it's OK to keep WPBSA in infobox, as it is the governing body)
  • "However, on the morning of 17 March the event was postponed.." - date not stated in the body of the article (but is supported by the source there)
  • "16th and penultimate ranking event" - source does not indicate which are ranking events, and includes some "possible" events, so does not verify this.
  • "organised by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association" - I think it's more accurate to say "organised by World Snooker" (or ".. World Snooker Tour"). The WPBSA owns 26% of World Snooker, against 51% controlled by Hearn. Alternatively, reword to reflect the WPBSA's role as the governing (rather than organising) body.
  • "In the Tour Championship, every match was played over multiple sessions" needs a source. (Looks like the SnookerHQ source has probably been updated, and no archive link.)
      • The article says "Every encounter will be multi-session affairs, with the quarter-finals the first to nine, the semi-finals the first to ten, and the final taking place over a whopping 25 frames." - I think this covers the above? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 16:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The final was played as a best-of-19 frames match" the archive of the source used wrongly states "best-of-27 frames final"
  • "The draw for the event was made on 15 March 2020." - not confirmed by source cited.
  • "It was the second professional tournament to be played after the season was halted due to the pandemic after the 2020 Championship League. " - archived source says "the first ranking event" not "the second professional tournament"
  • "The only difference from the money awarded in 2019 was a slightly increased prize for the highest break" needs a source.
  • "Highest break: £10,000" needs a source
  • "Total: £380,000" may need a source, I'll check whether simply adding the amounts is WP:OR or not.
  • Each match was played over two sessions in the same day." is not verified by the cited source.
  • "Ding Junhui who could not travel to the event from China due to the COVID-19 pandemic" - reason not stated in the cited source.
  • "The pair had met previously in the season at the Masters, where Maguire trailed 1–5, but won the match 6–5" - not in source, which has probably subsequently been updated.
  • "The pair had met in the final of the 2019 World Snooker Championship." needs a source.
  • "The semi-finals were also played as the best-of-17-frames matches over two sessions on 24 and 25 June." needs a source
  • "The final was played as the best-of-19-frames on 26 June 2020 over two sessions." needs a source
  • Linked archive copy, and live link, both have different amounts per player to what's shown in the table. Hopefully there is an archived version from a suitable date.
  • Source needed for winners of the World Grand Prix and Players Championship.
  • All info in the draw bracket is covered elsewhere in the article.
  • 5.1 Final
  • "Referee: Rob Spencer" needs a source.
    • Cited
  • Frame scores and breaks need a source.
  • No issues.
  • Assessment against criteria
    • (1c): well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate.
      • Sources are appropriate for the subject. No use of sources that are highlighted by Headbomb/unreliable.js or that are against current WP:SNOOKER consensus. WPBSA/WST sources are not used for any controversial claims. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • (2c): consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes or Harvard referencing.
Lee Vilenski please have a look at my comments so far when you have an opportunity. Thanks for all your good work on the article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • That should cover it BennyOnTheLoose. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:40, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes indeed, thanks Lee Vilenski. See a couple of minor comments under "infobox and lead" which I've added. Although the issue of Snooker Scene covering the event was published only after the article was written, and so it would be unfair to include it as "relevant literature" for assessment of criterion (1c), I'll check whether there is anything that looks significant there that isn't in the article here, and let you know. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Following the changes (and having read the Snooker Scene article as mentioned above), I'm happy to support. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm intending to claim WikiCup points for this review, and will probably do so after a couple of days. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Rodney Baggins[edit]

Hi Lee, I've done quite a lot of copyediting while going through the article. Anything you don't agree with, please revert, I won't be offended :) There are a couple more tweaks I want to make, but here are my comments for you to consider at your leisure/pleasure...

Lead
  • "Stephen Maguire defeated Robertson and Judd Trump; whilst Mark Allen defeated Shaun Murphy and Mark Selby to reach the final." - sounds a bit awkward and not particularly clear, would suggest expanding to something like: "Stephen Maguire met Mark Allen in the final; Maguire had defeated Robertson and Judd Trump in the two earlier rounds, whilst Mark Allen had defeated Shaun Murphy and Mark Selby [to reach the final]." (not sure if those last 4 words are actually needed!)
Overview
  • The sentences at start of para 2 are chronologically out of place because they relate to the eventual broadcasting of the event, whereas the rest of para 2 talks about the original schedule, postponement, etc. Should probably move these 4 sentences ("The tournament was primarily broadcast... ...by sports betting company Coral.") to end of section as a separate para?
    • That's kind of true. The broadcasters were set for before the event, and weren't changed, so I don't see an issue. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 16:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Quarter-finals
  • "The first round of the tournament was the quarter-finals..." - can we clarify that this is because there were only 8 entrants, e.g. "The first round of the tournament was held from 20 to 23 June, with matches played as best-of-17-frames over two sessions. As there were just eight competitors at the start of the event, the matches played in this round were effectively the quarter-finals."
    • ...I would, but it's not me who chose to call it the Quarter-finals, this is the round naming as per WST. I think they treat the rankings as their own qualification round. I've had some thoughts recently about how we should treat this in other articles, like the Masters, (and this years world championship), where the RSs use both "round 2", and "last/round of 16". The reason for not changing here, is that there isn't a source about this, it's just that they are denoted as being the quarter-finals.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 16:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The pair had met earlier in the season..." - sounds like we're talking about Maguire and Ding because of the previous sentence, so might be best to specify "Robertson and Maguire had met earlier in the season..." ?
  • Michaela Tabb is rather prominent in the image and even though the caption says 2013 it might look at first glance as if she ref'd this match - there are plenty of other images from that 2013 event to choose from!
  • "between reigning world champion Judd Trump and John Higgins" - maybe balance this by mentioning Higgins' rank: "world number five John Higgins"? (but then I suppose we'd have to mention all the other players' world rankings!?) (...but maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing!?)
    • No, we don't need to be super consistent with this, I have added such. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "fifth win in-a-row" > 'in-a-row' doesn't need hyphens but I wonder if "fifth successive win" OR "fifth straight win" would sound better anyway?
  • "Selby won the next two of the next three frames" > doesn't make sense, and shouldn't this actually be "three of the next four" (as the score jumps from 4–4 to 7–5)
  • "around the angles" doesn't link to glossary
Semi-finals
  • Do we need to clarify that the reason Trump and Maguire were the only two contenders for the Coral Cup was because of points accrued up to that point?
Final
  • I don't think we need to mention the year 2020 in the opening sentence (we didn't in the QF and SF sections). I'd suggest rewording this sentence to: "The final was played on 26 June as a best-of-19-frames match over two sessions."
  • I don't like the use of dashes in the highest break sentence, it looks a bit scrappy. Can't we just use commas: "...Maguire made the highest break of the tournament, a 139, in frame nine." It also might be worth clarifying that he actually won the frame (for the lay person), so "to win frame nine." or "in winning frame nine."
  • Suggested wording change: "Frame 16 was full of safety play" > "Frame 16 was dominated by safety play" ?
  • Maguire's prize breakdown is possibly a bit confusing. He won the Tour Championship title (£150K), the Coral Cup title (£100K) and the highest break prize (£10K), which gives a total of £260K ...but don't forget that back in March he also won the Players Championship prize of £30K, so his total prize haul for the Coral Cup was actually £290K. So should we mention that figure too? Would need to be sourced so it's not considered OR?
    • It's not the prize pool for the Coral Cup we are talking about. The figure is the money he earned by winning/taking part in this event. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seeding list / Coral Cup
  • Why are we using miniaturised tables in these two sections? Isn't there a MOS:ACCESS issue here?
    • I have no idea why these were on fontsize=85%... I've removed this. I don't think ACCESS is about that - it's more about screenreaders, etc, but not really suitable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should we not link to the three general event articles in first sentence? (World Grand Prix (snooker) / Players Championship (snooker) / Tour Championship (snooker))
  • "The top ten players with the most prize money won in total over the three events..." - might sound better as "The top ten players with the most prize money accumulated over the three events..." as 'won' is awkward/redundant in this sentence (subtle)

As for today... Darn that Crucible curse eh? My guess is KW will win the title this year, but here's hoping it will be Selby's fourth! Rodney Baggins (talk) 19:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at these as soon as I can. I've been a big Maflin fan since his run in with Selby in 2015, so it's been great to see him do so well. I do have Kyren to win it down. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:46, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No Selby's fourth - probably should have been. Wilson will win it one year, but he'll need to tidy up some of his game. O'Sullivan seems like he'll win the tournament without playing well. Thanks for your review, I've commented on the above.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lee, I'll have a last look through this and sign it off for you today. Rodney Baggins (talk) 09:29, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've gone through the article again in a bit more detail. The main thing that's occurred to me is this:

  • It says in the lead: "...on the one-year ranking list at the cut-off date." but there's no explanation of what that means. (1) What exactly do we mean by the "one-year ranking list"? (2) What was the cut-off date? Maybe this needs to be explained in the overview?

I also have a bunch of wording suggestions, listed below. Some of them are probably just down to personal preference but you might pick out some that you agree with. I do want to have a closer look at the sources and then I should be ready to support.

  • Would it be worth adding rough dates for the Gibraltar Open and World Championship in lead, for context, e.g. "...following the Gibraltar Open in March and preceding the World Championship in July/August."
    • To be honest, it seems a little bit overkill. It's not really about this article, and it's more to say where this event took place in the calendar. We do go into depth about where the event was held and postponed etc in the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not keen on the current wording in lead re. postponement, would this make more sense... "...but on the morning of 17 March the event was postponed, following advice from the UK government that no spectators would be permitted at the event because of the COVID-19 pandemic."
  • Not happy about the order and wording in last para lead. Would it be better to mention Ding dropping out first and then talk about how Maguire got on, to make it read more logically, e.g. "China's Ding Junhui, fifth on the one-year ranking list, was unable to travel to the event because of the COVID-19 situation. His replacement was Stephen Maguire, ranked ninth, who reached the final after defeating Robertson and Judd Trump. His opponent in the final was Mark Allen, who defeated Shaun Murphy and Mark Selby in the two earlier rounds. Maguire won the final 10–6 to claim the sixth ranking title of his career, his first for seven years. In winning the tournament, Maguire also won the Coral Cup."
  • Overview: Suggest putting "a subsidiary of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association" in brackets?
  • Overview: Should "The Tour Championship was set to take place..." be the start of a new paragraph?
    • I don't think so. The paragraph isn't all that long, and it's still about the organisation of the event Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slight wording change/clarification: "and moved to the Marshall Arena in Milton Keynes, England." > "and moved to a different venue, the Marshall Arena in Milton Keynes, England."
  • Maybe expand slightly, for context: "...the first being the 2020 Championship League." > "...the first being the Championship League which had taken place earlier the same month."
  • Link "isolation" to Isolation (health care) at end of Overview? Or is that too healthcare specific?
    • I think it's too much. Isolation generally means on your own in this context, wheras the players were isolated together! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:41, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quarter-finals: "guaranteed to surpass £1 million in prize money" > would "exceed" be a better word than "surpass"?
  • Semi-finals: "ITV commentator and analyst Stephen Hendry commented..." Could this perhaps be a new paragraph to break the section up a bit?

Oh, and finally, do we know why Allen was promoted to fourth in the world rankings? Was this for getting to the final or just for being runner-up?

  • Source just says promoted to fourth. I think stating either is a little out of remit, in that winning the event he was fourth. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for now, Rodney Baggins (talk) 22:17, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

I've done a thorough review of the sources and made a few corrections and added some missing archives. Outstanding problems...

1. There are lots of duplicate refs:

2. Some sources have been updated since they were first added to the article. Do we need to state the updated date to prove that we're citing the updated version of the article?

  • Ref.18 (date has changed from 14 July > 16 July)
  • Ref.20 (date has changed from 14 June > 16 June)
  • Ref.23 (date has changed from 21 June > 22 June)
  • Ref.27 (date has changed from 21 June > 22 June)
  • Ref.28 (date has changed from 22 June > 23 June)

3. Archive problems:

4. Dynamic sources:

Rodney Baggins (talk) 11:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hurricane Noah[edit]

I just want to say that I am coming here looking for a review for my article, Tropical Storm Vicente (2018). If you would be willing to take a look, that would be fantastic! NoahTalk 14:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • 20 to 26 June 2020 I would prefer if dates like this conform to the style in the infobox. NoahTalk 14:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • You mean with endash? Sure, I have changed if it'd be better. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes... there are a few more of these present throughout. I just like to see all the date ranges consistent. NoahTalk 15:30, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hurricane Noah: We always fully spell out the date range in words in the body of the article, as we do in all snooker articles, and reserve the en dash format for infoboxes, tables, etc... "which took place from 20–26 June 2020" would disagree with MOS:DATERANGE which states "Use an en dash, or a word such as from or between, but not both: from 1881 to 1886 (not from 1881–1886); between June 1 and July 3 (not between June 1 – July 3)" I've reverted Lee's change accordingly. Rodney Baggins (talk) 16:09, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should probably give a brief description of what a century break is since it is a technical term. I didn't know that one could not miss a shot, for example. NoahTalk 14:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • We do link to our article on both century break as well as break. I realise it's a reletavely jargonish term, but it's a break of over 100. I have reworded slightly.
Given the rather extensive reviewing above, I could not find a lot of issues to comment on. NoahTalk 14:46, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comments[edit]

Hi Ian Rose - do I need to do anything further with the above? Four supports, image and source review done. Just want to check I don't need additional commentary. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:05, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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