Talk:1986 World Snooker Championship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured article1986 World Snooker Championship is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 12, 2020Good article nomineeListed
September 6, 2020Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 29, 2020.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that prior to the event, bookmakers' odds against Joe Johnson winning the 1986 World Snooker Championship were 150 to 1?
Current status: Featured article

Qualifying for 1986 Embassy World Championship[edit]

1st qualifying round: D Gilbert beat R Bales 10-7; O Agrawal beat Dennis Hughes 10-6; T Kearney beat Glen Wilkinson 10-5; B Oliver beat J O’Boye 10-8; D Sheehan beat P Houlihan 10-7; M Gibson beat G Jenkins 10-4; S Simngam beat B Bennett 10-0; Jim Bear beat P Burke 10-8; T Drago beat G Cripsey 10-4; Martin Smith beat D Greaves 10-4; B West wo J Giannaros; P Thornley beat D Mienie 10-3; R Grace beat M Parkin 10-8; S Hendry beat B Demarco 10-7; P Watchorn wo J Rempe; B Mikkelsen beat J Hargreaves 10-7; M Darrington wo W Saunderson

2nd qualifying round: J Wych beat T Chappel 10-6; S Duggan beat M Fisher 10-3; T Jones beat V Harris 10-7; D Gilbert beat M Bradley 10-7; S Newbury beat O Agrawal 10-5; I Black beat B Harris 10-8; G Scott beat T Kearney 10-8; D Fowler beat B Oliver 10-8; C Roscoe beat G Foulds 10-3; W King beat D Sheehan 10-4; M Gibson beat M Morra 10-9; P Medati beat S Simngam 10-9; R Chaperon beat F Jonik 10-8; M Gauvreau beat Jim Bear 10-5; F Davis beat D Chalmers 10-6; P Francisco beat T Drago 10-4; J Donnelly beat Martin Smith 10-6; B West beat J Dunning 10-3; Tommy Murphy beat J McLaughlin 10-7; P Thornley beat P Fagan 10-7; W Jones beat R Grace 10-3; S Hendry beat P Browne 10-9; E Sinclair beat P Morgan 10-8; J Van Rensburg beat I Williamson 10-9; John Rea beat E McLaughlin 10-6; S Longworth beat P Watchorn 10-7; G Miles beat C Everton 10-3; R Foldvari beat G Rigitano 10-6; M Watterson beat B Mikkelsen 10-2; L Dodd beat J Fitzmaurice 10-6; M Darrington beat J Meadowcroft 10-6; R Edmonds beat B Kelly 10-0

3rd qualifying round: J Wych beat S Duggan 10-5; D Gilbert beat T Jones 10-7; S Newbury beat I Black 10-2; D Fowler beat G Scott 10-7; W King beat C Roscoe 10-5; P Medati beat M Gibson 10-6; M Gauvreau beat R Chaperon 10-8; P Francisco beat F Davis 10-1; B West beat J Donnelly 10-5; Tommy Murphy beat P Thornley 10-3; S Hendry beat W Jones 10-8; J Van Rensburg beat E Sinclair 10-2; S Longworth beat John Rea 10-4; R Foldvari beat G Miles 10-7; L Dodd beat M Watterson 10-1; R Edmonds beat M Darrington 10-5

Final qualifying round: M Hallett beat J Wych 10-7; D Martin beat D Gilbert 10-5; J Spencer beat S Newbury 10-7; D Fowler beat M Macleod 10-6; D Reynolds beat W King 10-7; C Wilson beat P Medati 10-6; R Williams beat M Gauvreau 10-3; N Foulds beat P Francisco 10-9; B Werbeniuk beat B West 10-8; E Hughes beat Tommy Murphy 10-7; S Hendry beat D O’Kane 10-9; J Campbell beat J Van Rensburg 10-6; J Virgo beat S Longworth 10-8; J Parrott beat R Foldvari 10-6; P Mans beat L Dodd 10-7; R Edmonds beat M Wildman 10-9

188.29.8.15 (talk) 01:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Ralph[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1986 World Snooker Championship. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 21:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

5x expanded by Lee Vilenski (talk) and BennyOnTheLoose (talk). Nominated by Lee Vilenski (talk) at 21:55, 9 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • Fivefold expansion began on 7 May; well referenced; Earwig's is clean. Both hooks are cited but AGF for ALT1 whose source is behind a paywall – in my opinion the original hook is much more interesting. QPQ is done. Minor nitpick, @Lee Vilenski: the article uses both "150/1" and "150–1". I'm not sure which one is more correct but they should probably be the same. :) 97198 (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Lee Vilenski: the hook is awkwardly worded. Do you mean the odds against him were 150 to 1? Would you mind doing some rewording? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure Yoninah how is the below? I'll change in the article Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2... that the odds against Joe Johnson winning the 1986 World Snooker Championship waswere 150 to 1? Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/snooker/2953941.stm
  • Better, thanks! Restoring tick per 97198's review. Yoninah (talk) 22:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:1986 World Snooker Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cavie78 (talk · contribs) 19:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I'll take a look at this Cavie78 (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for taking this on. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • Looks good, but would nice if you could change at least one "event" here for "tournament"? "sole ranking event. Prior to the event, bookmakers' odds for a Johnson victory were 150–1. A total of 20 century breaks were made during the event"
    • Changed one to "competition", and one to "event" - I think "competition" works, but let me know if not. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:03, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Overview

  • "the modern era" this can mean all sorts of different things - clarify what you mean
  • "The championship" - "The 1986 championship" (you've only talked about the WSC in general in this section up to this point)
  • " Joe Davis won the first World Championship in 1927..." It seems odd to me that you talk about the history of the WSC, then the 1986 tournament, then go back to talking about the history of the WSC. I think these final two sentences would work better before the sentence that currently begins "The championship featured 32 professional players..."

Prize fund

  • "with a bonus of £80,000 if a player made a maximum break" Clarify that this bonus would go to the player making the 147 - it sounds a bit like £80,000 would just be added to the general prize fund
  • "The winner of the event won a total of £70,000. The breakdown of prize money for the event" Again, can we lose an "event" for "tournament"? I think it would be better to say "£70,000 was reserved for the winner of the event [or tournament], with a full breakdown of prize money as shown below" or similar
  • Any details about prizes for qualifying? You mention Hendry winning £1,750 in the following section
    • Section amended. Looks like there was no prize money before the third qualifying round - the B&H Yearbook source shows the money received by each professional player for each tournament during the season. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:20, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Does this still tally with the total price fund being £350,000? Cavie78 (talk) 15:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Qualifying

  • "during match against Paddy Browne" -> "during his match against Paddy Browne"
  • "and earnt £1,750" -> "and earned him a prize of £1,750"
  • "conceded the frame when" -> "conceded the next frame when"
  • "behind with the brown to black balls, totalling 22 points, still on the table, which meant he could draw the frame" -> "behind despite the brown to black balls, totalling 22 points - enough for him to draw the game, still being on the table"
  • "18th frame from 53 points behind" -> "18th frame while 53 points behind'
  • "and lost 8–10" -> "and lost the match 8–10"
  • "green to born" -> "green to brown"
  • "in a traffic collision that injured" -> "in a traffic collision which injured"
  • "He beat Omprakesh Agrawal 10–5" I feel like it would be better to say something like "Despite the accident, Newbury beat Omprakesh Agrawal 10–5"
  • "Newbury became the first player in this year's competition to qualify for the Crucible rounds against a top 16 player," ?!! In the following sentence you say he lost in Round 4 of qualifying to John Spencer, so he didn't qualify for the Crucible?

First Round

  • "The first round were played as the best-of-19-frames matches over two sessions, and all took place between 19 and 24 Apri" -> "The first round was played as best-of-19-frame matches over two sessions, and took place between 19 and 24 April"
  • "lost the first seven frames against Mike Hallett, and ended their first session 1–8 behind" -> "lost the first seven frames of his match against Mike Hallett, and ended the first session 1–8 behind"
  • "Like Spencer in 1978, Terry Griffiths in 1980, Cliff Thorburn in 1981 and Steve Davis in 1982, Taylor was unable to retain his first world championship, known as the Crucible Curse." -> something like "Like Spencer in 1978, Terry Griffiths in 1980, Cliff Thorburn in 1981 and Steve Davis in 1982, Taylor was unable to retain his first world championship. This inability of a first time champion to defend their title has become known as the Crucible Curse."
  • "Second seed Davis beat Ray Edmonds" I think it would be better to say "Second seed Steve Davis beat Ray Edmonds" here, just to clarify (given that Fred Davis also took part in the qualifiers)

Second round

  • "The second round matches were played as the best-of-25 frames matches over three sessions" -> "The second round was played as best-of-25 frames matches over three sessions"
  • "and all took place between 24 and 28 April" -> "and took place between 24 and 28 April"
  • "Davis and Mountjoy" -> "I think it would be better to say Steve Davis and Doug Mountjoy here for the same reason as the mention of Davis in the First Round section
  • "Mounjoy did not pot a ball" -> "Mountjoy did not pot a ball"

Quarter-finals

  • "The quarter-finals were played as the best-of-25 frames matches over three sessions on 29 and 30 April" -> "The quarter-finals were played as best-of-25 frames matches over three sessions on 29 and 30 April"
  • "in-a-row" -> "in a row"
  • "Barbara Thorburn, in Canada, gave birth to their second child during the match" -> "Barbara Thorburn, gave birth to their second child in the couple's native Canada during the match"

Semi-finals

  • "The semi-finals were played between" -> "The semi-finals took place between" (to avoid repetition of "played")
  • "their first session ahead 4–3" -> "their first session 4–3 ahead"
  • "to win at 16–8"
  • but tied the match at 3–3" -> "although he did go on to win the game and tie the match at 3–3"

Final

  • "following which Johnson" - "after which Johnson" (to avoid repetition of "following")
  • "Johnson had another run" -> "Johnson won another run"
  • "crowd response was in favour of Johnson" -> "the crowd responsed in favour of Johnson"
  • "as well as accompanying" -> "as well as him accompanying"
  • "This was Johnson's only ranking event win in his career. He would win two non-ranking tournaments at the 1987 Scottish Masters and 1989 Norwich Union Grand Prix." -> "This was Johnson's only ranking event win in his career, although he would go on to win two non-ranking tournaments - the 1987 Scottish Masters and 1989 Norwich Union Grand Prix."
  • "The odds on Johnson was" -> "The odds on Johnson were"
  • "against winning the event" -> "against him winning the event"

Other

  • You should add a detailed fair use rationale to the image of the programme
  • Sources look good, no copyvios
  • Placing on hold Cavie78 (talk) 15:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • P.S. Could you or @Lee Vilenski: add info about Hunter's wildcard to the Paul Hunter article? You added something to the GA review page but not the article itself

FAC promotion[edit]

Hi guys, I've been working up to giving my comments in the FA review, but I now see that I've missed the boat because it's just been promoted. I was going to get this finished yesterday but have had a major family crisis that got in the way. Where would you like me to put my comments now, as I do have several that you might be interested in? Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! No issues. Put them here and we can still work through them! Don't feel you've wasted any time, anything to improve the articles. I do have two others at FAC (I don't hang about sadly!) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:44, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll throw these into the mix then. Some are more important than others but see what you think!
Lead
  • "The defending champion was Northern Ireland's Dennis Taylor" → why highlight the fact that he's from NI but no equivalent for the other players mentioned in the lead?
    • Yeah good point. I like adding countries to give some colour, but it should be more than one. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to win his first title" → do you mean "first world title"? The 1984 Grand Prix was his first ranking title
    • Good point. I don't like the "world title" being a specific thing usually - but it works in this case. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Taylor lost in the first round of the event 6–10" → Following on from the previous sentence, it sounds as if we're still talking about the 1985 final, so maybe clarify "In defence of his title, Taylor lost in the first round of the event 6–10"?
  • Any particular reason why the infobox has flags when none of the other WSC articles do, e.g. previous (1985), next (1987), etc.
    • It's an argument if WP:INFOBOXFLAG applies in these cases. I see you've played with this already. I can't say I care one way or the other. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Overview
  • In 3rd sentence, it says "knockout format" and lower down it says "single-elimination format" (with wikilink), but as they are just different terms for the same thing, should we not (1) link the first mention rather than the second, and (2) be consistent with terminology?
    • Hmm, I'd like your opinion on this. Strictly speaking a knockout tournament doesn't mean single-elimination. In most cases knockout just means a tournament that isn't round-robin or challenge style. A double-elimination bracket is also a knockout event. The reason for the word is that is what people call the tournament since the challenge matches ended. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:17, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 3rd sentence, "and being organised by the WPBSA," doesn't fit and should probably be removed as it doesn't really make sense
  • "held at Camkin's Hall" → if we're going to link to Bill Camkin here, should it not at least be piped: [[Bill Camkin|Camkin's Hall]]?
    • No, per WP:DONTFIXIT - Someone may make an article on Camkin's Hall at some point. The only issue is piping to a redirect. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:21, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The 1986 Championship" → can this be changed to the full "1986 World Snooker Championship" or just "The 1986 tournament" or even "The 1986 championship" (lc)
Lc works for me. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:29, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The 32 competitors in the main tournament" → having already stated "The 1986 Championship featured 32 professional players..." (above), this could probably be reduced to just "These 32 competitors..."?
    • Changed to "these competitors" the number is a bit pointless. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:29, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Prize fund subsection, I always think "Semi-finals" should be "Semi-finalists" and "Quarter-finals" should be "Quarter-finalists" because we're talking about the players (as in "Winner" and "Runner-up" above) not the rounds. I believe this has been implemented in 2020 World Snooker Championship but not any of the other snooker tournament articles.
    • I rarely look at this section to be honest - I'll try and keep it in mind. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:29, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Qualifying
  • There's no entry in the glossary for "deciding frame" → I noticed the same error in 2020 World Snooker Championship Tournament Summary, so maybe a better solution would be to add it as a new entry in the glossary rather than just removing the links?
First round
  • "looking jaded" → put "jaded" in quotes assuming that was the word used by Clive Everton?
    • Amended. The word is used in the title of Everton's article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • These should just use the surname strictly speaking...(but it probably sounds a bit odd?) "Second seed Steve Davis" → "Second seed Davis"; "who lost 2–10 to Terry Griffiths" → "who lost 2–10 to Griffiths"
Second round
  • "did not pot a ball" sounds kind of incomplete → could this be changed to "did not pot a 'single' ball" or does that sound naff?
Quarter-finals
  • "Cliff Thorburn played Willie Thorne and won 13–6." → maybe expand to: "Cliff Thorburn played Willie Thorne, winning comfortably 13–6."
    • Our MOS actually says never to say this - it suggests that Thorne was no match for Thorburn (and thus not as good a player). Happy to change to ",winning 13-6" when next at a PC. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tony Knowles played Kirk Stevens." → very short, uninteresting sentence, maybe change to: "Tony Knowles played Kirk Stevens in the fourth quarter-final." just to pad it out a bit?
Semi-finals
  • "According to Sydney Friskin's match report in The Times," → do we need to mention Mr Friskin? Just say: "According to the match report in The Times," ...cf. match report in QF section above (which doesn't mention the name of the Times reporter concerned)
  • "Johnson played having taken painkillers for a cyst on his back before the match." → change to something like "Johnson won the match despite having taken painkillers for a cyst on his back before the start of play."
Qualifying
  • I noticed there are 17 matches listed in the 1st qualifying round (might expect 16) so it just struck me as a strange number.
    • There were 113 entrants (although three later withdrew) so this was to reduce the numbers for the "last 96" round. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why are some players not linked at all, not even with a redlink? e.g. Derek Mienie, Bernie Mikkelsen, Wayne Sanderson. How do you make the distinction? Is it because they were rubbish and never likely to be notable? I noticed that Sakchai Sim Ngam is redlinked in this table but not in Tournament summary Qualifying section above which is inconsistent.
    • Rubbish is a bit harsh, but yes basically because they don't seem likely to be notable. Definitely not an exact science. I've delinked Sakchai Sim Ngam and Dennis Hughes. I've seen some coverage of Bob Harris and Bert Demarco, so am planning to have a go at creating articles for them at some point in the future. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • WP:REDLINK only covers notable players. Where that line is, might be a bit hard to tell - should we REDLINK only obviously notable players? Only players who have been on the Tour? Or link all players except the obviously non-notable. I tend to do the latter, as if I'm going to search out to see if a player is notable - I might as well write the article. The other options often mean if an article is created, someone has to then find the back links. I prefer doing it this way. However, we shouldn't link all players - just those who have a chance of having an article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:45, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Refs
  • Please can you check the page numbers for the Luke Harris book citation (ref. 1); chapter "Snooker and billiards" is listed as page 227 (to 237) on the contents page (look inside [7]) so pp. 276–278 doesn't make sense. Also, the ISBN you have cited appears to be an ebook (but not the one that shows up in the linked version which is 978-1-315-71426-4). I actually think we should be using the ISBN of the printed book version (978-1-138-88723-7) – see below...
    • Looks like I need to stop using the "cite Google books tool". (On a different article, I found that Google books pages were from a different book than the one stated.) Unfortunately I can't see the index for between chapters 8 and 33 on Amazon Books. I agree with your point, please amend if I've not implemented it correctly. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the Victoria Williams book (ref. 2) again you are using the ISBN of the ebook, should we not be citing the printed book version (978-1-61069-639-5)? Template:Cite book says "Use the ISBN actually printed on or in the book" and I've always understood this to mean the printed version (usually the original hardback) but I see that you have linked to the ebook versions for verification.
  • For the Clive Everton book (ref. 7) you are using ISBN 978-1-78057-399-1 which is the 2011 ebook version, but the book was originally published in 2007 with ISBN 978-1-84596-199-2 (see [8])
    • Changed to the 2012 paperback edition, which I've checked the page number in. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Nick Metcalfe article (ref. 53) appears to have been reissued on 21 July 2020 and a new archive was saved at Wayback Machine on 19 August 2020. So the original cited date (23 April 2020) doesn't match what you get when you click on the link or the existing archive version. I don't really understand why they had to go and reissue this one because the article actually says "On the day the World Snooker Championship should have been getting under way..." which was clearly 23 April 2020 not 21 July 2020!!
  • I would say the title of the Hugo Kastner document (ref. 61) is "Crucible Records – bis 2011 (until 2011)" as I think "Snooker – Spieler, Regeln & Rekorde" is more the filename rather than the title of the article?
  • Are there any more details for the Crucible Almanac? Like, does it have a publisher name and an ISBN number?
  • AFAIK, Ref. 62 is not dead and I think you'd be better using a more recent archive that actually looks like the current version of the page, as the current archive is an old WWW SNOOKER one.

I think my problem is that I'm too thorough for my own good. It's a gift but also a curse! Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:08, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you, this is most helpful. I'll get to work on this - but as it's not on the candidates list, there's no immediate deadline. All seems like reasonable points, I'll start making some changes soon. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:05, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, this is very helpful. Thanks Rodney Baggins. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1986_World_Snooker_Championship&oldid=1196229469"