Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Women's Professional Billiards Championship/archive1

Women's Professional Billiards Championship

Women's Professional Billiards Championship (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured list candidates/Women's Professional Billiards Championship/archive1

Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I think it has suitable coverage of the topic. I don't think you will find much else online about the Championship. I wasn't sure if I should attempt a featured list, or GA, nomination for the article but have plumped for FLC. As ever, I'm happy to provide relevant extracts from sources to reviewers. Thanks for all comments and feedback to help improve the article. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 01:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Comments

• The lead seems very short at just four sentences, but maybe that's all there is to say?

• I'm not sure there is much else to include there, but always open to suggestions. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

• "women players" reads really oddly to me, as "women" isn't an adjective. Would "female players" work better?

• Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

• "their progress in the game has been held back by sexism" - should this be in the past tense? or are they still held back in this way?

• Given that the relevant sources cited are from 1987 and 1999, I'll see if I can find something more recent. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

• "It was agreed with the Billiards Association and Control Council that the WBA would take over the running of the competition as a world championship, with the same trophy used in 1930, from 1932" - so who organised the 1931 tournament?

• Nicely spotted. I've amended the article and addded another source. For some reason the later books start with the 1931 tournament, so I think I just assumed that was when the WBA ran it from, without checking for consistency in the article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

• Think that's all I've got....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks, ChrisTheDude. Let me know if there is anything else. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

• Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:48, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Lee Vilenski

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

Lede

Prose

Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Please let me know if you have any suggestions. Thanks, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

CommentsSupport from TRM

Fascinating read.

• Mild concern that this is more likely to be a GA than an FL. If we had more critical coverage of the tournaments and finals (and after all, this article is about the competition itself, not just the finals) then we could probably get double the prose here.

• There is very limited coverage of most of the finals. Some of them get a few paragraphs in The Billiard Player, others almost nothing. There's not much depth in newspapers either. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:19, 22 June 2022 (UTC) Oh, and same applies for the other matches. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

I've had a look at some of the reports, and a lot of the details are not suitable to be summarised in Wikipedia. Examples from The Times, 18 May 1938; "[Billiards] it may be, is one of the most difficult of all games for women to play. Careful thought and assiduous practice have to given to it ..."; that year, The Billiard Player contained only passing coverage. Gardner's letter to the editor querying this was published, with a response "we will ... publish all news according to its value". (The June issue, which could have included the women's championship, did have room for reports on the London Busmen's championship and about Horace Lindrum intending to take a holiday in Italy.) On balance, I think keeping the article as a list (perhaps with some refocusing?) might be better than converting it to more a prose-based article, but I'll take advice. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• In fact, it's almost like the notes should be part of the main prose, in an expanded "History" section, and the table at the end just summarises the year/finalists/result etc.

• Perhaps, but it might be hard to make engaging prose out of it. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• Four-sentence lead is too brief for me by far.

Not done, yet. See below. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• Shouldn't " Burroughes and Watts" be in the infobox as well as organisers?

Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• "1,000-960" en-dash. And was the aim to get to 1000 points? What were the winning criteria?

• Let me see if the sources cover the winning criteria, i.e. which years were first to a target and which were timed. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
• Looks like there are sources on this for some years, but not for all. Shall I add a sentence along the lines "In some years the match winner was the first to reach a pre-determined points target, and in other years the winner was the player to score most points in a set playing time."? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

• Yes, that's good. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 14:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

• "John Roberts Jr" missing a full stop after Jr?

• Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• "company Burroughes and Watts organised" you linked this previously...

• De-linked. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• Dislike the split in tables, maybe just footnote or have a row span for the different titles.

• Combined with row span, happy to amend again. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• "Carpenter averaged 11.92 " unexplained what this "average" means.

• Added, to the effect that it's "points per visit", with a cuegloss link to visit. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• "1,000-563" en-dash. There are several of these, check throughout.

• I think I amended them all now. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• "1,992–1,531, ,2162–1,795, " odd stuff here.

• Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

So I enjoyed it, but have some concerns... The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Thank you. I look forward to your further advice following my responses; I'll expand the lead after hearing from you. (Scope of the lead might change depending on other changes to the article.) Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:29, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: If you get a chance, please let me know what you think about my responses and the next steps. Thanks, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm content with the changes made thus far and just one response above. Also reasonably content this can remain as FLC. I am sporadic at the moment, for which I apologise, so consider this a support at this point. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 14:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Accessibility review (MOS:DTAB)

• Tables need row scopes on the "primary" column for each row, which in combination with column scopes lets screen reader software accurately determine and read out the headers for each cell of a data table. Row scopes can be added by adding !scope=row to each primary cell, e.g. | 1 in the second table becomes !scope=row | 1. If the cell spans multiple rows, then use !scope=rowgroup instead, e.g. |rowspan=2|British Women's Billiards Tournament becomes !scope=rowgroup rowspan=2|British Women's Billiards Tournament
• Please see MOS:DTAB for example table code if this isn't clear. I don't return to these reviews until the nomination is ready to close, so ping me if you have any questions. --PresN 19:45, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you, PresN. Please could you have a look to see if I have properly addressed this? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk)

• Looks fine. --PresN 16:27, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Z1720

• Since the article is for a tournament that ended in 1950, I am confused as to how events in 2018, 2019 and 2021 relate to this tournament. I think this information would be better placed in a general article about woman's cue sports, and not in this article

• this was my over-enthusiastic response to the review comment "should this be in the past tense? or are they still held back in this way?". I've relegated it to a footnote, but happy to remove it completely if that's better. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• "with the same trophy used from 1930, from 1932." I am very confused by this and I'm not sure what it's trying to tell me. I think the sentence needs to be rearranged

• Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• I see that there was a 7 year gap from 1941-1947. Why is this not mentioned in the history section, and the reason why it did not run?

• Added this in, with some tweaks around it. I couldn't find anything in sources about why the tournament didn't happen in 1946 or 1947; in September 1946 it was announced that there were three entrants, and in April 1947 that a tournament would take place two weeks after the men's championship, but 1948 was the first post-war staging. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• Image check: pass.
• The caption for the last image is missing a bracket.

• Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• File:Strebor v Collins at English billiards (1906).jpg (the first image) is missing alt text

• Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• Source check: Version reviewed
  • Ref 2: Suggest archiving the link.

• Done. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• • Ref 4: Since this is an offline source, is there a page number?

• There wasn't in the database I used, but the article can be found online so I added the url. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

• • Ref 15 and 19: These appear to be the same refs. I suggest merging the citations.

• Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Those are my comments. Please ping when the above are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 02:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks for this, Z1720. Let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:28, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Support. My concerns have been addressed. Z1720 (talk) 13:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)