Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2023/September

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


CueTracker

Does anyone know why I can't use CueTracker in a hyperlink for a data source? AlH42 (talk) 19:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Because it's Wikipedia:BLACKLISTed. See MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist Nigej (talk) 19:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
It's unreliable. We stay far away. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:37, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Seems a shame. I've always found them a most reliable source of information.
Do you know why they are blacklisted? AlH42 (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, it was slammed across thousands of articles making claims that weren't true, specifically for claims about career century breaks that didn't add up. You can do a search in the archives at the top of this page for "cuetracker" and you'll get a LOT of topics on the subject. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
My own view is that's it very reliable is most aspects. However we've had trouble with people using composite information from it, like career centuries and career earnings. This has proved problematic since it uses a different definition of what events are covered to the "official" list, resulting in different number of career centuries for instance. eg it had 602 centuries for Shaun Murphy when the official total was 600. Nigej (talk) 19:44, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Now that the WST has completely screwed up its website (just at the start of the new season - good timing) and there is no longer a live scores resource, is there an argument for getting CueTracker un-blacklisted? It seems to be the only place to find centuries and high breaks for the current Championship League.  Alan  (talk) 18:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I've entered a request for "whitelisting" for CueTracker at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. I hope I've done it correctly. So we'll see what happens.  Alan  (talk) 19:08, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Well that was spectacularly unsuccessful. Nobody showed any interest in responding to my request until the early hours of this morning. A bit late considering that the tournament ends today, and then the response completely misunderstood what was being requested. So I have now given up.  Alan  (talk) 09:47, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

"Defending champion"

There has been some localised debate about this, but I'd like to propose that we refer to a player as the "defending champion" in a tournament only when he or she will participate (or did participate) in the event in question. If the player does not compete, for whatever reason (withdraws, does not qualify, suspended, etc.), then he or she should be called the previous year's winner and not the defending champion.

E.g., the current article on the 2023 Tour Championship reads:

"Neil Robertson was the defending champion, having defeated John Higgins 10–9 in the previous year's final. However, Robertson was unable to defend the title at the 2023 edition as he was outside the top eight on the one-year ranking list after the WST Classic."

To me "was the defending champion" conflicts with "was unable to defend the title". If Robertson didn't qualify to defend the title, how can he have been a defending champion? HurricaneHiggins (talk) 11:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I think we did discuss this earlier somewhere, should be "reigning champion" or something. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
The problem is that most broadcasters and journalists will always refer to the current champion as "defending champion", and rarely use "reigning champion" (often that terminology is used by the Master of Ceremonies when introducing players). In the case raised by the OP, it is true that Neil was technically "defending champion" up until the point when he was unable to gain entry to the tournament, due to lack of ranking points on the one-year list. While I understand the concern raised about the Players' Series events wiuth regards to phrasing the article lead of the previous years' winner, that is just an issue specific to those three tournaments and nothing else, because the previous editions' champion isn't guaranteed to be there to defend their title until the cut-off point has past for each tournament. I think we need to just develop a better standard that handles the specificities of the Players' Series, because its unique in that the previous champion is not automatically entered into the events they won, unlike say the Masters where the previous winner will always be entered, irrespective of their ranking. -- CitroenLover (talk) 21:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
That's not entirely true. Players have withdrawn before events have taken place as reigning champions before. Just wise to say in prose reigning rather than defending, if they didn't actually defend the title. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:28, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
The infobox has a defending-champion parameter but no reigning-champion parameter, so I'm a bit stuck as to what to do about Luca Brecel, who has not entered the 2023 Championship League (ranking) tournament.  Alan  (talk) 19:08, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
I think a "reigning-champion" parameter should be added to the "individual snooker tournament" template. I had a look at the template but I'm not sure I could do it without screwing it up! Could somebody have a go at this please.  Alan  (talk) 07:05, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Personally, I'd just prefer "previous champion" or similar. That's how Wikidata defines it, and we wouldn't have to remove the item from the infobox. We mention what happened to the previous champion quite heavily in the lede and body so that would make sense to also include in the infobox. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:41, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
That makes sense. Will you change the template then?  Alan  (talk) 08:47, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
We'd probably need a bit more input to make a change like that across that many pages. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:54, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Is it possible to leave the parameter name as it is, and just change the text that is displayed in the infobox. That way only the template would need to be changed.  Alan  (talk) 09:51, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Lee. I just had a look at the template again, and I think it would work if we changed the line:
  • | label13 = {{nowrap|Defending champion}}
  • to
  • | label13 = {{nowrap|Previous champion}}
  • or
  • | label13 = {{nowrap|Last champion}}
 Alan  (talk) 10:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Nicknames

Hi, I know Nigej has done significant work on this previously, but we've had a lot of vandalism of nicknames on players. Is it worth us moving them off the individual pages and have them centrally maintained (like we do with century breaks?). That way we can discuss which ones are actually viable on one page, rather than have all sort of nonsense across lots of pages. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:27, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

I would support central maintenance. Those sections are magnets for original research and vandalism. I remember a particularly distasteful one for Rory McLeod I removed several times. Andygray110 (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
I produced a list awhile back: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2020/December#Nicknames. A look at some of these indicates that there have been quite a lot of changes since then. This has been a perennial problem, see eg Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archive 8#Nicknames again. Obviously centrally maintained is not ideal since it's somewhat contrary to the anyone-can-edit principle but there does seem to be a particular problem in this case. One option is to simply remove it from the infobox but overall I'm thinking that the centrally maintained approach may be the best. We also need to decide the relationship between this information and that in the article List of snooker player nicknames. Nigej (talk) 05:47, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm against bothering with nicknames at all, except perhaps for those best known like the Rocket and the Whirlwind. But then it's impossible to know where to draw the line.
Surely there's a way to maintain a central list in List of snooker player nicknames and then link to this data in the infoboxes for individual players.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
The Manual of Style gives a little advice. MOS:BADNICK says that "Nicknames that are sourceable but not generally known to the public ... are not encyclopedic." and that would be my view too. Many of the nicknames we have are in this category (e.g. some of those at the bottom of http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/snooker/6612887.stm. Maguire the "the Merlin of Milton"?), although we always have to be aware of WP:RECENTISM (i.e. the nickname was well known in the past but has fallen out of fashion). Another aspect that we need to consider is the references. Most nicknames in the infoboxes are unreferenced but when they are, they are sometimes used elsewhere in the article (e.g. Ronnie O'Sullivan) or use a named reference from elsewhere in the article (e.g. Graeme Dott) which could make the central list idea a bit more complicated, especially if the information was used in List of snooker player nicknames too. Of course, we don't necessarily need the same inclusion criteria for the infobox parameter and for List of snooker player nicknames (which could perhaps have a broader remit) although probably it makes sense for the two to be the same. See also: Lists of nicknames#Sports nicknames Nigej (talk) 07:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Stage 1

There seems to be consensus to centralise the Nickname parameter, to try and reduce the perennial problem of original research and vandalism related to it. My proposal is that, as a first stage, we follow the approach used for century breaks/current ranking. It seems sensible to avoid having named references in the centralised file which are used elsewhere in the biography (as is the case for Ronnie O'Sullivan) since, although it might work, it's really going to confuse editors, but the opposite, the use of named references in the centralised file which are defined in the biography seems acceptable to me (and in theory should be encouraged since infoboxes are meant to be a summary of the article content). At the end of this first stage we'd have a list of Nicknames and could then move on to a discussion about the nicknames and the relationship between the infobox nicknames and those in List of snooker player nicknames. Nigej (talk) 08:17, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Personally I would just keep it simple. Use the most recent nickname used on the World Snooker website, with a bit of discretion permitted for historic players. I would scrap the List of snooker player nicknames. The article is a pile of crap and drags down the snooker project IMHO. Betty Logan (talk) 09:53, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I would agree with this "keep it simple" approach of using the most recent nickname from the World Snooker website, or otherwise the most common nickname by which a player has been known. E.g., I don't see the point of listing "The Essex Exocet" as a nickname for Ronnie O'Sullivan (source: A BBC article from 20 years ago) when he has been widely known for most of his career as "The Rocket". HurricaneHiggins (talk) 16:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I also think the "keep it simple" approach would be the best, and agree that the List of snooker player nicknames should be scrapped.
https://wst.tv/players/ has 248 players, only 91 of which have nicknames listed.
I've made these 91 into a table and put it in my sandbox. Have a look and see if this will help.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 16:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
It looks good. In the case of retired/deceased players, the List of snooker player nicknames may have some sources we can recycle. For example, this old page refers to Joe Davis as "The Sultan of Snooker" (although I prefer his other nickname "Emperor of pot"). Although Allison Fisher is not listed listed on the World Snooker website she is well known as "The Duchess of Doom", and there is a reputable source for her on the list of nicknames. Betty Logan (talk) 17:14, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I think she earned the nickname Duchess of Doom on the 9-ball pool circuit, though, not in snooker? HurricaneHiggins (talk) 17:43, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
You might be right, but this raises an interesting question about what to include in a snooker infobox. The Allison Fisher article uses the snooker player infobox which also includes her pool achievements, and also her nickname. She has had a more notable career as a pool player so it might be better to use the pool player infobox on her article. Betty Logan (talk) 00:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
I would agree that it's more appropriate to use the pool infobox for Fisher. She is far more notable as a pool player than a snooker player — although the claim in her article that she has a "reputation similar to" Phil Taylor, Steve Davis, and Stephen Hendry would seem to overstate the case significantly. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 09:32, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
I suspect she has a snooker infobox, because we didn't have a pool one until (relatively) recently. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Yes looks good to me too. I have created {{Infobox snooker player/nicknames}} which has the 168 articles which currently have nicknames. Many look pretty lame to me. NB This list includes all uses of Infobox snooker player and so covers a few non-snooker players who use that infobox. Nigej (talk) 17:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
That looks like a really good start Nigej. Please let me know when you've extracted all you need from my sandbox list so that I can delete it.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 17:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
Nigej
Your new template seems to be working really well and I've been working away at it whenever I have time, adding references where I can find them or adding citation required as a reminder where I can't.
I did make a major screw-up yesterday when I edited a batch of references and it all went pear shaped. Undid it all and then discovered that I'd missed out a pair of curly brackets.
Do you have any problem with the edits I've done so far?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:45, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Late to this conversation but I have no issue with central management of nicknames. And I agree with the necessity of just having one nickname per player, and we should only use the nickname "commonly" attributed to the player. If there are "other nicknames" that are used and there is a consistent "pattern" in who uses that nickname, then it could be included, but otherwise, I generally agree with the proposal to centrally manage all nicknames for snooker players. -- CitroenLover (talk) 14:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
As I've been going through this I've found that mostly they do only have one. A number have two or three. The one with the most is, I think, Steve Davis with six, all of which seem to be valid and are all referenced.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 07:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
I've just done a count-up. There are 170 entries in the template (I added Joe Johnson and Sunny Akani), Of these, 140 have just one nickname. 22 have two. Five have three (they are Andy Hicks, James Wattana, Judd Trump, Mark King and Stephen Hendry). Kirk Stevens is the only player with four. Anthony McGill is the only player with five. As mentioned above, Steve Davis has six.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 11:06, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
For the record - there are 63 entries in the template that have one or more citation needed tags. 64 if you include Allison Fisher who I left alone since she was the subject of much discussion earlier in this thread.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 17:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
I've just added citation needed for Allison Fisher so that is now 64 entries in the template that have one or more citation needed tags.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 06:24, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

WST list

Just wondering what people think of the idea of simply using the WST list (see User:AlH42/sandbox) for the players listed there. There seems to be a bit of support above for the idea. Obviously this would reduce the nicknames to just one per person for those in that list. To me MOS:BADNICK implies that simply finding a reference to a nickname is not sufficient, they "must be frequently used by reliable sources". I'd have thought that a nickname from an official organisation would give significant weight to the nicknames listed there. If there are a few in the list that are a concern these could be discussed separately. Nigej (talk) 08:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I have been using the WST list to update the template and am close to finishing. As I said above, mostly they do only have one. A number have two or three. The one with the most is, I think, Steve Davis with six, all of which seem to be valid and are all referenced.
There are a number of pool players and others (including a poker player) which I think should be deleted from the template.
There are a lot of citations required that I have added. In my view, if we can't find a reference then the entry in the template should be deleted.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
@Nigej -- I like this proposal of listing the most common or prevalent nickname and ignoring others. There are, as always, a few edge cases. Steve Davis has several legitimate nicknames, including The Nugget, Interesting, and Romford Slim. Stephen Hendry in my experience is better known as "The King of the Crucible" than "The Golden Bairn." Mink Nutcharut has adopted "Mink" as the name by which she is known on tour, so listing it additionally as a nickname could cause confusion. Otherwise, no issues with this at all. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 11:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
I have added a new table to my sandbox with data extracted from the template. This table only has one nickname per player. It should make it easier to identify which players need to be deleted from the template, and to provide valid references for those with a citation needed tag.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 10:47, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
I have identified some players with nicknames listed by https://wst.tv/players/ but missing from the template. So I have added to both the template and the list in my sandbox:
Mink Nutcharut (Mink) NOT ADDED
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 14:14, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
The table in my sandbox has now been updated to accommodate the 30 players with more than one nickname.
I have also identified, by means of a grey background, some possible candidates for deletion from the template, each of which would need to be agreed in this forum.
Alan, AlH42 (talk) 06:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for all your work on this, Alan. However, in years of following snooker, I have never heard Steve Davis called "The Ginger Mushroom". I know you have provided a source for this, but it's surely been rarely used. I think we should restrict this list to commonly used nicknames only — in Davis's case, I'd suggest "The Nugget", "Interesting", and "Romford Slim". That said, he got the "Romford Slim" nickname while playing in the Mosconi Cup, so — similar to "The Duchess of Doom" — it's debatable whether that's a snooker nickname or a pool nickname. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 12:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
You're welcome. For me, the only valid nickname for Steve Davis is "The Nugget". The "Interesting" tag came from Spitting Image and was never a proper nickname, and this is fully explained in the main text of his article. The only references I have provided are the ones from https://wst.tv/players/. All of the others have been extracted from other articles.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 13:25, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Following on from the discussion with HurricaneHiggins about Steve Davis, I've looked at the 30 players that have more than one nickname listed in the template and it seems to me that we should limit each entry to one nickname. So the following lists all 30 with my thoughts on what should be done:
  • John Bear: Should be removed from the template. No references found.
  • Nigel Bond: Keep only "00-147" from wst.tv. Delete "Basildon".
  • Ali Carter: Keep only "The Captain" from wst.tv. Delete "Mr Angry".
  • Steve Davis: Keep only "The Nugget" from wst.tv. Delete the rest.
  • Ken Doherty: Keep only "The Darling of Dublin" from wst.tv. Delete "Crafty Ken".
  • Tony Drago: Keep only "The Tornado" from wst.tv. Delete "Maltese Falcon".
  • Peter Ebdon: Keep only "The Force" from wst.tv. Delete "Psycho".
  • Neal Foulds: Keep only "Fouldsy" from greenbaize1972.com. Delete "Buzby".
  • Anthony Hamilton: Keep only "The Sheriff of Pottingham" from wst.tv. Delete "The Robin Hood of Snooker".
  • Barry Hawkins: Keep only "The Hawk" from wst.tv. Delete "The Darling of Ditton".
  • Stephen Hendry: Keep only "The King of the Crucible" from the BBC. Delete the rest.
  • Andy Hicks: Keep only "The Cream of Devon" from wst.tv. Delete the rest.
  • Robin Hull: Keep only "The Flying Finn" from wst.tv. Delete "Roope".
  • Jak Jones: Should be removed from the template. No references found.
  • Mark King: Keep only "Kojak" from wst.tv. Delete the rest.
  • Lyu Haotian: Should be removed from the template. No references found.
  • Stephen Maguire: Keep only "On-Fire" from wst.tv. Delete "Maverick".
  • Anthony McGill: Keep only "The Glaswegian Gladiator" from wst.tv. Delete the rest
  • Tony Meo: Keep only "The Cat" from Eurosport. Delete "Meo, Meo".
  • Fergal O'Brien: Keep only "Fearless Fergal" from wst.tv. Delete "The Baby-Faced Assassin".
  • John Parrott: Keep only "The Entertainer" from snooker.org. Delete "Mr. JP".
  • Neil Robertson: Keep only "The Thunder from Down Under" from wst.tv. Delete "The Melbourne Machine".
  • Noppon Saengkham: Keep only "Moo" from womenssnooker.com. Delete "The Daddy".
  • Semih Sayginer: Should be removed from the template. No references found.
  • Kirk Stevens: Keep only "The Man in the White Suit" from worldsnooker.com. Delete the rest.
  • Willie Thorne: Keep only "Mr Maximum" from the BBC. Delete "The Great W.T.".
  • Judd Trump: Keep only "The Ace in the Pack" from wst.tv. Delete the rest.
  • John Virgo: Keep only "JV" from wst.tv. Delete "Mr. Perfection".
  • Ricky Walden: Keep only "Stamina Man" from The Racing Post. Delete "The Walnut".
  • James Wattana: Keep only "Thai-Phoon" from snooker.org. Delete the rest.
Anyone agree/disagree?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 18:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm happy with the one nickname idea. IMO we should only have more than one if we get a consensus on that. Nigej (talk) 19:01, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Nigej.
Anyone else? Lee Vilenski? HurricaneHiggins? Betty Logan? CitroenLover? Andygray110?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 19:28, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Happy with the general idea. However, “Crafty Ken” is a valid nickname imo: pundits, commentators and many others refer to it, and its used often enough to be notable for inclusion. Romford Slim for Steve Davis should remain as well imo, as it was commonly used when he played on the pool circuit. Will review this later as watching Eurovision right now. — CitroenLover (talk) 20:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Tend to agree with you about "Crafty Ken" for Ken Doherty. But then what about "Scarface"? He was always referred to as that earlier in his career in Ireland.
As for "Romford Slim" for Steve Davis I disagree. He was referred to as this in pool, not snooker, and this is fully explained in the main text of his article.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 20:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Thing is, the infobox doesn't descriminate as a "snooker only" infobox (even though it's called that). If someone has a nickname from another sport (provided it's suitable), it's no less suitable for the infobox than it being a snooker one. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:26, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Understood Lee. However, since "Romford Slim" is covered in the main text of the Steve Davis article, I think it's unnecessary to have it in the infobox as well.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:24, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
That's what infoboxes are for though. Arguably they shouldn't be in the infobox at all if they aren't included in the prose of the article. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Lee. Trouble is, for the majority of snooker players, the only place the nickname appears is in the infobox.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 10:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm on board with limiting it to one nickname, unless there is a strong case for including another. Neal Foulds and Noppon Saengkham look like they have WP:RS issues. Regarding "Crafty Ken", has he ever been formally introduced by this nickname as he enters the arena? I only ever recall "Darling of Dublin", and "Crafty Ken" just seems to be a pet name that some of the commentators use. Betty Logan (talk) 20:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
In general I'm happy with moving to one nickname per player in the infobox. I'd make exceptions for Joe Davis ("the Sultan of Snooker" and "the Emperor of Pot") and Steve Davis.
  • There's at least one source apart from the B&H yearbook for "Buzby" for Foulds. But I can't say I remember this nickname ever being used. I didn't get any matches for "Fouldsy" there.
  • Steve "Interesting" Davis throws up over 300 matches on newspapers.com, although looking at the first 20 or so, lots of them are for a radio programme of that name.
  • I was going to suggest adding "Clown Prince of Snooker" for Jackie Rea, but that's also used to refer to both John Virgo and Dennis Taylor in various newspapers.
Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Benny. Joe Davis does not currently have an entry in the template, but you could add one if you like. The nicknames you refer to are covered in the main text of his article, along with a reference.
Regarding Neal Foulds. Back when he was playing, as far as I recall, I don't think he was introduced using a nickname atall. The "Buzby" nickname was just a joke about him spending a lot of time on the phone. The "Fouldsy" nickname is, I think, more valid and he is referred to as this all the time on Eurosport (various Eurosport references are available). Also his Twitter name is @fouldsy147.
As for Steve Davis, the "Interesting" tag came from Spitting Image and was never a proper nickname, and this is fully explained in the main text of his article.
Jackie Rea does not currently have an entry in the template, but you could add one if you like.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:28, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
We've got to find a way to keep the "Emperor of Pot"; it's the greatest nickname ever! Betty Logan (talk) 09:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Betty. Joe Davis does not currently have an entry in the template, but you could add one if you like. The nickname you refer to is covered in the main text of his article, along with a reference.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 10:26, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Betty. Joe Davis has now been added to the template by Benny.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 13:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Betty. You're right about Ken Doherty. He used to be referred to as "Scarface" earlier in his career in Ireland, but I think the only valid nickname for him is "The Darling of Dublin".
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:26, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Betty. Regarding your comment that Neal Foulds and Noppon Saengkham have WP:RS issues. For "Fouldsy", if greenbaize1972.com is unreliable then I'm sure I can provide a reference from Eurosport. For Noppon, I think that womenssnooker.com is a reliable source. This reference was just Mink saying in an interview that Noppon's nickname is "Moo".
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 17:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi Alan. I didn't realise that womenssnooker.com was the official ladies' snooker site, so that should be fine. Unfortunately greenbaize1972.com looks like a WP:SPS website, and therefore is not a reliable soure. I'm not doubting it, I 'm sure it's probably correct, but the snooker project is trying to move away from these fan-based sites as they don't meet Wikipedia's WP:RS criteria. If you can source an alternative source it would be greatly appreciated. Betty Logan (talk) 19:50, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Betty. I now have a problem with Neal Foulds. Searching Eurosport for a reference for "Fouldsy" I came up with https://www.eurosport.co.uk/snooker/shoot-out/2022-2023/snooker-shoot-out-2023-live-stream-updates-mark-williams-jack-lisowski-vladislav-gradinari-all-in-ac_sto9357446/story.shtml but then found a more valid reference for "Buzby" at https://www.eurosport.com/snooker/then-and-now-neal-foulds_sto2224101/story.shtml and so now I don't know which to go with although I'm pretty sure "Buzby" was just a joke. Also his Twitter name is @fouldsy147.
Alan AlH42 (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Also happy with the one nickname idea. This would not imply that a player has never been known by another nickname, but that the nickname in the infobox is the one that has been most prevalent. Even Steve Davis's own website (stevedavis.org.uk) lists only one nickname: "The Nugget". HurricaneHiggins (talk) 09:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello HurricaneHiggins. Totally agree.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 10:28, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
I've been working away at the template (and mirroring the changes in the table in my sandbox) for a while now and have probably got as far as I can for now. I've also mirrored the changes to the template made by Benny in the table in my sandbox. We have now ended up with one nickname for each player with the following exceptions:
  • 2 for Joe Davis ("The Sultan of Snooker" and "The Emperor of Pot": Requested by Betty, added by Benny.)
  • 3 for Steve Davis ("The Nugget", "Romford Slim" and "Interesting": Discussed with Lee.)
  • 2 for Ken Doherty ("The Darling of Dublin" and "Crafty Ken": Discussed with CitroenLover.)
  • 2 for Neal Foulds ("Fouldsy" and "Buzby": I've found valid references for both on Eurosport and can't choose between them.)
  • 2 for Stephen Hendry ("The King of the Crucible" and "The Golden Bairn": Using the BBC and wst.tv respectively.)
  • 2 for Anthony McGill ("The Glaswegian Gladiator" and "Licensed to Thrill": Using wst.tv and the BBC respectively. The second one could be deleted though.)
There are still 42 "citation needed" tags that require investigation. There are also a number of entries that could be deleted from the template. I've indicated some of these by means of a grey background in the table in my sandbox.
Any comments?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm happy to help look at some more of the citation needed ones. (John Rea, King of the Baize?) Should I make any updates directly into the template? Are we including cases like "Joe" for Shailesh Jogia as nicknames? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:22, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Benny. Yes - please continue to edit the template directly as you have been. Up to general consensus as to which entries get deleted. My view would be to delete both the ones you mention.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I agree with Alan. WP:BOLD applies, especially when following the apparent consensus to trim the list down. Nigej (talk) 15:50, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Nigej. I just added a reference for Ram Vaswani, but I think he should actually be deleted from the template since he is actually a poker player. What do you think?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 18:31, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I have changed his article to use the poker infobox and have removed him from our list. At one time his article had some snooker content but this has subsequently been removed. Perhaps a hoax, not sure. Nigej (talk) 19:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Following the work done by Benny and myself, we are now down to only four "citation needed" tags that require investigation:
So I think we are now in pretty good shape on this issue.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Here's a Sporting Life article that quotes a Eurosport tweet calling Jak Jones the Silent Assassin. Here's a piece from The Sportsman calling Jamie Jones the Welsh Warrior. Not finding any sources for "The Judge" or "The Iron" and I might suggest this means the nicknames are not notable enough for inclusion. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for those. Two refs added and two entries removed. All done.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

I've added a documentation file to held future editors. Feel free to edit it as you see fit. Nigej (talk) 14:02, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Brilliant! I was just looking at that. Very useful.
Now we have to decide what to do with the "List of snooker player nicknames". We could either scrap it altogether, or perhaps find some way to transclude the data from the template into it. I have mirrored the template data in my sandbox, but have had to do this manually. Is there some way to automate the process?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Some further thoughts on what to do about the "old list".
  • If we scrap it as suggested by Betty Logan much earlier in this thread, we would need to modify any other articles that refer to it. There are a few; Lists of nicknames is one.
  • I have been through the references in the "old list" and "borrowed" quite a few for the template. I don't think any of the rest are worth keeping.
  • I have been looking at transclusion in the Wikitext help articles, and now my brain hurts. I don't think it's worth the effort to try to automatically update the article.
  • While working on the template, I have kept the list in my sandbox up to date. The only differences between my list and the template are the named references in the template that are defined in the biographies. There are only 14 of these. In these 14 cases I have had to include the full reference in my list.
  • So - we could completely replace the table in the "old list" with the one from my sandbox. This would mean that anyone editing the template would also need to update the list article to suit. This doesn't seem too onerous to me. The article would, of course, be subject to vandalism as it has many times in the past, so I think it would need to be semi-protected like the template.
This last bullet point would be my preferred option. Anyone agree/disagree?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
There aren't that many links to it, so there won't be much work involved. Now the nicknames are centralised I don't see any reason to retain it. Is the integration of nicknames complete i.e. is there anything else on the list that needs to be harvested? Betty Logan (talk) 22:55, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
I think we're pretty much finished with it.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 05:48, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
If we tried to delete it we might find that other people argue for keeping it along the lines of WP:NOTCLEANUP. If it's a notable topic for a list per WP:NLIST then in theory it ought to be kept and somehow "improved". Personally I'd be happy to see it deleted, but mirroring the infobox file would be another option. Nigej (talk) 05:52, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Nigej. So which option would you prefer? I'm going with "improvement" and Betty Logan wants it deleted. Are you ambivalent?
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 06:22, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Probably I'd go for deletion, but as noted I'm wonde/ring whether that would pass an AfD. Nigej (talk) 08:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Well it might do on the vandalism issue alone.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
I've been looking at the deletion policy, and it seems to me that we would be hard pressed to get agreement to delete it on the grounds of past vandalism alone.
That being the case, and bearing in mind what Nigej said earlier in this thread about "being bold", I propose to replace the old messy table with the tidier new one currently in my sandbox. I'm happy to keep it up to date by mirroring the data from the template as and when it changes, and have created some tools to make it fairly easy to do that.
I would also keep an eye on it for vandalism, and if this becomes a problem we could either ask for it to be semi-protected like the template, or try to get it deleted.
So unless there are any strong objections in this forum, I will do this tomorrow morning, and then we'll see what happens.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
I will nominate it for deletion, since I don't really see the point in maintaining the info in two separate places. If the result is to retain it then we can go with your suggestion copy in the template. Betty Logan (talk) 01:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
You can find the nomination here. If it fails, I am happy to go with your suggestion, Alan. I don't think it matters much either way, but it's a bottom-rung article and monopolizes resources so we would be better off rid of it IMO. Betty Logan (talk) 03:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
OK - so we will wait and see.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 05:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
So far - nobody other than Betty Logan and myself has contributed to the deletion process. As far as I understand, an administrator will make a decision after about a week. If there is no consensus for deletion then nothing will happen. So please get your votes in.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Apologies, I have not been able to get onto Wikipedia for several weeks due to a busy work schedule. Since I've been OOTL for most of this conversation, there's not much I can add now, other than recommending that the list page linked above be deleted and continuing to advocate for the central management of the nicknames. -- CitroenLover (talk) 09:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello CitroenLover. No apology required. Just get your vote in here.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 11:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Now that the "old list" has gone, here's a run-down of where we are with the template:
  • There are 151 entries, all of which have citations.
  • 88 of the citations are taken directly from the WST list.
  • Only one player, Steve Davis has three nicknames listed. They are "The Nugget", "Romford Slim" and "Interesting".
  • Four players have two each. They are:
    • Joe Davis has "The Sultan of Snooker" and "The Emperor of Pot".
    • Stephen Hendry has "The King of the Crucible" and "The Golden Bairn".
    • Ken Doherty has "The Darlin' of Dublin" and "Crafty Ken".
    • Neal Foulds has "Fouldsy" and "Buzby". I would like to get rid of one of these but I can't decide which to keep.
  • There is one pending entry, for Victor Sarkis, which is currently waiting for review. So I've put his entry into the template sandbox for the time being.
Alan. AlH42 (talk) 19:40, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Paradoctor has just removed four citations from the template since they were from alchetron.com which is apparently a WP:MIRROR. They were for:
  • Muhammad Asif "Pawa"
  • Leo Fernandez "Fandango"
  • Bjorn Haneveer "The Iceman"
  • Zhiting Wu "Invincible Gal"
If anyone can find valid references for these nicknames, please add them in. Otherwise the entries should be deleted.  Alan  (talk) 06:36, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
I've deleted those four entries from the template.  Alan  (talk) 10:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
@AlH42 Hi, please update the nickname links for the various Chinese players who have been banned to web.archive.org versions. The citation link for them points to 404 Not Found, because WST have apparently outright deleted the pages associated to all of these players. CitroenLover (talk) 19:35, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@CitroenLover: I think the WST have completely lost the plot! First they scrap a perfectly serviceable live-scores site and replace it with something which is frankly not fit-for-purpose. Now they've deleted valid historical data on these players (some of whom will be returning to the tour at some stage), while still incorrectly keeping them in the rankings list. Anyway (rant over), there are only three of the banned players with nicknames in the template. They are Liang Wenbo, Yan Bingtao and Zhao Xintong.
I have no idea how to go about updating references to web.archive.org versions, and I haven't the time at the moment to learn another new trick. So, if you (or anyone else) would like to do the archiving, and then send the new references to my talk page, then I'll update the nicknames template to suit. The non-working references are <ref>{{cite web |url=https://wst.tv/players/liang-wenbo/ |title=Liang Wenbo |publisher=wst.tv |access-date=14 May 2023 |url-status=live}}</ref>, <ref>{{cite web |url=https://wst.tv/players/yan-bingtao/ |title=Yan Bingtao |publisher=wst.tv |access-date=14 May 2023 |url-status=live}}</ref> and <ref>{{cite web |url=https://wst.tv/players/zhao-xintong/ |title=Zhao Xintong |publisher=wst.tv |access-date=9 May 2023 |url-status=live}}</ref>.  Alan  (talk) 07:41, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
AlH42, I ran IABot on the template page. This seems to have worked. Hopefully there are no unwanted side-effects. You can go to "View history" and select "Fix dead links" to do this on any page, or go https://iabot.toolforge.org/ - the Bot is quite often down, but when it's available it's really handy. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Benny. That seemed to work well.  Alan  (talk) 16:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
The WST is inconsistent in its handling of data for banned players. The ten players recently banned have had their pages deleted, while three other players currently serving bans (David John [banned until later this year], Thanawat Thirapongpaiboon [banned to 2025] and Yu Delu [banned to 2029]) still have pages on the WST website.  Alan  (talk) 10:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
There may be an underlying explanation. You can only belong to the WPBSA through membership of your national association, so if the ten Chinese players were expelled by their national association their WPBSA membership would also automatically end. Betty Logan (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Liang and Li

As both players are permanently banned and have very little chance of getting a successful appeal, we should seek to have information across the pages about these players written in the past tense, as well as the "currennt ranking" for both players being removed unconditionally from the template. Additionally, matches which were proven to have been fixed should, imo, have notes added to indicate to readers that the result was fixed as part of the investigation. Thoughts? --CitroenLover (talk) 18:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I think we need to wait a bit. https://wst.tv/rankings/ still shows their rankings as valid. Alan. AlH42 (talk) 20:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Yes, technically they are not former professional snooker players until they are expelled/resign from the WPBSA. Until that happens they are officially banned professional snooker players. I know it's quibbling over semantics, but still...
Do you know if World Snooker has published a clear list of the matches each player was found guilty of fixing? I checked the WPBSA statement on this earlier and it seems very disorganised.
What a waste of talent and opportunity. Betty Logan (talk) 21:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
I can't find a list as such, but all the matches are detailed here but not in any useful order. Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:12, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi Betty, all the specifics for matches that were impacted are on the charge sheet linked above by Alan [you may find it useful to use excel to separate each players’ charges so you can see common matches referred to]. In this case, as Liang and Li are permanently banned, they have most likely already been expelled from the WPBSA, but those pages will probably be updated nearer to the new season starting. — CitroenLover (talk) 08:44, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
That would be quite a job if you're willing to take it on, I'm not! The PDF is protected so you can't "copy" stuff from it. The data is a mess since it's a legal document and doesn't have a useful list. Alan. AlH42 (talk) 09:01, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
I need the details so I can expand the match-fixing table. I have uploaded the document to my Google drive, and Google viewer allows you to copy the text from the document. I have set it to general access should anyone else want to to copy wording over: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ygO9Zo3jkqQfkGT-8tmpcTWln5JOY6jw/view. Betty Logan (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@AlH42: im not sure if it was yourself who worked on the /rankings subtemplate for the snooker player infobox, but im just wondering if we could have a parameter for “last known ranking” if a professional player falls off-tour [either due to ranking and failing to get back on, or by being banned]. My reasoning for this is that it looks exceptionally silly having the current ranking for Li Hang and Liang Wenbo when they’re clearly banned and won’t be coming back, thus their ranking is no longer “current”, so realistically we should be archiving their final known ranking at the end of the last season they competed, so the information is not lost. — CitroenLover (talk) 21:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
No it wasn't me, never been in that template. But if it has the same sort of structure as the nicknames one, all you need to do is remove the relevant data from the template. If you like you could add something in prose in the main article.  Alan  (talk) 06:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Just had a look at the rankings sub-template and I think that all you need to do is delete the lines "|Li Hang=71" and "|Wenbo Liang=72" and then add some prose to their articles.  Alan  (talk) 07:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
I still think we need to wait a bit. https://wst.tv/rankings/ is still showing their rankings as valid. It will probably stay that way until all the appeals processes have been completed.  Alan  (talk) 08:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Oh, apologies, thought it was yourself lol! @Nigej: thoughts on above? And yeah, im aware we should wait, but WST is slow to update their pages [and probably isn’t going to do much with it considering they hired someone to replace the site], and I’m cognizant that the new season officially gets under way from next week. Even if Liang and Li try to appeal their permabans [i find it very unlikely Liang will try], they are still gonna be off tour and thus not have a ranking that could he deemed as current. — CitroenLover (talk) 22:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
@CitroenLover:: That being the case, why not just delete the two entries from the rankings sub-template as I suggested above? If WST are working on their website (just days before the start of the season!) is that the reason this site has been down the last couple of days?  Alan  (talk) 06:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Performance timelines of suspended/banned players.

I would like to start a discussion here in hope of finding a consensus on how to deal with suspensions/bans in performance timelines. Currently we tend to list players as withdrawn (WD) from events they were suspended from. But now with the group of Chinese players/suspended I’m really thinking that’s not right. These players didn’t withdrew, they were quite simply banned from competing in these events since january.Tvx1 10:46, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

In the case of tournaments that players were prevented from entering due to a ban/suspension the current labelling (i.e. A) probably adequately addresses their status. In the case of tournaments where a player entered and subsequently could not play due to a ban or suspension, then I would agree that labelling them "withdrawn" is a misrepresentation, and would go with DQ (Disqualified) in those cases. We don't want the tables becoming to granular, but there is a distinction between withdrawing of your own personal volition (e.g. illness, scheduling conflicts) and the WPBSA preventing you from participating. Betty Logan (talk) 17:33, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Disqualification normally only applies in finals, from what I can tell. I haven't seen DSQ used across any other performance tables just because a player got suspended after having entered a tournament. In any event, WST/WPBSA use the term "withdrawn" when a player is subsequently no longer able to compete in a tournament they had already previously entered, as confirmed for the German Masters and Welsh Open last season. -- CitroenLover (talk) 20:48, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
It's not that we only use it for finals, but rather that DQ is for matches that took place and then later the match was awarded to their opponent, which is incredibly uncommon. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:47, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

1999 China Open venue?

While I was working on the ranking tournaments list, I noticed that the venue for the 1999 China Open is shown as Beijing in both the tournament article and the list article. I'm not sure if this is correct. Both snooker.org and CueTracker give the venue as Shanghai. Does anyone know which is correct? Alan. AlH42 (talk) 08:02, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I've amended the venue, supported by a reference, at 1999 China Open (snooker). Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:39, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. I've done the list article. Alan. AlH42 (talk) 11:05, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

2023 Championship League (ranking)

The new season starts soon, with the ranking version of the Championship League starting on the 26th. Some initial information can be found here. It might be an idea to create an article ready for this, but I don't know how to do it.  Alan  (talk) 09:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

The best way of creating a page on a recurring tournament is to just use the history of the previous edition and find a version just before the tournament started, as that will give you a base for initial formatting that you can modify based on newer info. — CitroenLover (talk) 18:20, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello and thanks for that. I didn't make myself clear. I know how to create the article. What I don't know is how to bypass the draft review process. For example, there's a draft for Victor Sarkis that hat been under reviw for months!  Alan  (talk) 18:49, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
When i created a few stub pages before, I never went through a draft review process. I just went to the red link page [either manually going to the url, or finding the red link somewhere on another page] and then created the page normally. Not sure what process you’re using that leads you to making a draft, but I would skip that since its obviously not working in our case for snooker pages. — CitroenLover (talk) 10:39, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
OK I've made a start on 2023 Championship League (ranking) and will build it up over the coming days.  Alan  (talk) 11:41, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Well that was really easy! So why are there over 4000 drafts awaiting review?  Alan  (talk) 12:39, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I’d wager no one really looks at draft pages any more. I think we should get that draft page about Victor Sarkis out of the draft namespace and into the main namespace, so its not a permanent red link at some point :D — CitroenLover (talk) 20:09, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I think somebody does. It was rejected twice! But - have a go if you like.  Alan  (talk) 20:49, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
{{u|AlH42}} - just so you know, the AfC process is open to all, but is only required for non-confirmed users. Sometimes it is suitable to go through drafts even if you don't have too. You can simply move an article into main space (using the move command) to bypass AfC, although you'd have to be sure that the topic meets GNG (or another notability guideline). Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Lee. Do you think the Victor Sarkis article is good enough to move? I'm sure there are less notable players with stub articles, and there have not been many players from Brazil on the tour. He'll be playing in Group29 of the Championship League on the 29th June (he's red-lined at the moment), and it would be good to be able to put him back into the nicknames template just for tidyness.  Alan  (talk) 09:09, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: Any further thoughts about the Victor Sarkis article? Could we get it moved?  Alan  (talk) 08:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Snooker lists

I've been messing about with snooker lists lately (I like lists). I'm currently looking at the List of snooker players by number of ranking titles and would like to change all the Flagicons to Flagathletes, but I notice that the template specifies using {{flagicon|}}{{sortname||}} for the players' names. Does anyone know if there a reason for this? Flagicons are particularly annoying when the current flag is different to the relevant flag (look at Silvino Francisco in the list for an example). Also I see no reason why we need to use {{sortname}} since the list is not sortable. So I've copied the list into my sandbox and changed the flags etc. and it all seems to work OK. Take a look at it in my sandbox. If there are no objections I'll make the change to the article.  Alan  (talk) 10:27, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

livescores.worldsnookerdata.com

Folks, the above website is no longer reachable [the domain appears to have either expired or its server has been turned off]. It’s being replaced with https://scores.wst.tv but i am aware we’ve placed references to the former websites in snooker articles. We’ll need to rescue such pages using the internet archive, assuming that they will be available, or change the reference to use something else as the new site probably won’t have archived data. — CitroenLover (talk) 14:40, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Without the live scores site, it's hard to find the century breaks for the current tournament. I got one from snooker.org but there must be more. Does anyone know where to find these?  Alan  (talk) 06:56, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
The only place I could find them is from CueTracker, which is, of course, blacklisted. Is there anywhere else?  Alan  (talk) 09:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
The new site https://scores.wst.tv is now up and running, but (IMO) it is sh*t compared to the old site. Still relying on CueTracker for centuries and high breaks.  Alan  (talk) 18:13, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
I have sent an email to info@wst.tv with the following text:
Please can we have the old live scores website (https://livescores.worldsnookerdata.com/) back.
It worked really well.
Your new live scores website (https://scores.wst.tv/) is less functional.
It does not list centuries or AST as the old site did.
It is much harder to navigate than the old site.
It shows some matches results incorrectly. For example on 2023-06-30 it shows Ken Doherty beating Dylan Emery 3-0. The actual result was the other way round.
It does not indicate 50+ breaks at all.
It would be useful if others could send similar messages to them.  Alan  (talk) 12:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm sure I will regret asking this, but what is "AST"? And yeah, the new design is atrocious. Clearly WST never heard the phrase "If it aint broke then don't fix it...". Betty Logan (talk) 17:28, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't understand why you would reget asking. I'm 76 and learn something new every day by asking "stupid" questions. AST stands for Average Shot Time. Yes, they have made an appalling job of this, and their timing could not have been worse. I am sure there are thousands of references to the old site throughout Wikipedia snooker articles that will now not work. Please send them an email Betty, even though they will probably take no notice, it's worth doing.  Alan  (talk) 20:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Alan, I will email World Snooker when I get home this evening. It's a terrible design, but unfortunately there seems to be a trend these days of making websites less informative. I think it's because they are designing websites now for mobile use rather than computer use. Betty Logan (talk) 11:06, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't mind the design, but they should, at the very least, get the information correct. There is a match being played at this very minute between Anthony Hamilton and Xing Zihao. WST is showing Xing 2-0 up on Hamilton, but snooker.org is showing the opposite. I would tend to believe the latter!  Alan  (talk) 11:58, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Update: they've just corrected it.  Alan  (talk) 12:12, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
I have emailed them and asked them to restore the century list. Hopefully if enough people ask for this then they will reinstate it. Betty Logan (talk) 05:08, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
I didn't even get an acknowledgement for my email, let alone a reply.  Alan  (talk) 08:47, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Wow, they've really pooed on the carpet with this one. Century breaks are proper broken, and you can't navigate it the same. Basic info that was on the previous site (brackets, prize money, century breaks for a tournament) are completely missing. Some of this info can come from snooker.org, and snooker scene likely does still print century breaks for a tournament, but this is significantly after the event ends. They want to make the site more mobile friendly, but it was easy enough to navigate before.
Hopefully this is just a case of taking a bit of time for it to be fixed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: We can only hope that they sort it out before we get into the main tournaments of the season, but I'm not holding my breath. I trust that you, and everyone else in this forum, emailed them. I know Betty Logan did, and I did twice but with no response. I tried to get CueTracker whitelisted just for the recent tournament, but was not successful as noted in another part of this forum. I have not been able to find any resource other than CueTracker.  Alan  (talk) 12:25, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I didn't get a response either, not even an automated one. Maybe tweeting at them might yield more success, and including some snooker journos such as Dave Hendon and Hector Nunn. Betty Logan (talk) 13:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Also this guy...https://twitter.com/ProSnookerBlog. Betty Logan (talk) 14:01, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Betty Logan: Tweet on Betty. I don't do "social media" myself.  Alan  (talk) 15:29, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't either, Alan. But given the lack of response I don't think this is just a case of waiting for it to be fixed. Betty Logan (talk) 15:53, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't know what else we can do.  Alan  (talk) 19:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
WST has just announced here that they have two million followers on Facebook, so it might be an idea to have a go at them on that platform. As I said before, I don't do "social media" myself but someone in this forum must do.  Alan  (talk) 13:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Well this isinteresting:
https://wst.tv/temporary-live-scoring-update/
 Alan  (talk) 20:12, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Just goes to show, it is always worth complaining because occasionally you get a result. Betty Logan (talk) 07:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
@Betty Logan: Not sure if it's a result or not. Only time will tell. At least they said "We appreciate your patience." Mine is running out. In the meantime we are still reliant on CueTracker which is still blacklisted, wrongly in my opinion.  Alan  (talk) 07:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
Even Mark Williams is complaining about it: https://twitter.com/markwil147/status/1691163941357985793 HurricaneHiggins (talk) 23:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Well it has improved a bit. I've been using it for the Brit Open Qualis, and it now has current break, remaining points, and 50+ breaks; so you can use it to get centuries but still no list unfortunately. They've put a lot of effort into putting up the players' photos though (presentation clearly more important than content). I heard that this all came about because they fell out with their software provider. What really annoys me more than anything else is the way they show Chinese names, which to me is disrespectful to the Chinese players.  Alan  (talk) 06:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
I see in the "match detail" view, they're bolding the last part of names now, so that it's Graeme Dott vs Zhang Anda, per one match underway this morning. Of course, this means they're bolding surnames in the case of Western players, but given names in the case of Chinese players, which is nonsensical. They don't even need the bolding ... Graeme Dott vs Zhang Anda is perfectly readable on its own. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
I totally agree. What is worse is that they make the same mistake on the screens behind the players at the venues, even at the World Championships.  Alan  (talk) 10:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Being positive, here's a tip: Since the new live scores site from the Woeful Software Team is almost impossible to navigate, if you go to snooker.org (easy to navigate) and find the match you're interested in, you can then click on the "Frame details" icon which will open a new browser tab with the WST match data, including 50+ breaks and centuries. That's how I made the citations for Cao Yupeng's highest break (145) at the Championship League and Sean O'Sullivan's maximum at the European Masters Qualifying.  Alan  (talk) 09:08, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
I'd like to stay positive, but I can't. Now that there's a tournament underway, the Woeful Software Team live scores site is completely (can't think of an appropriate term without swearing.)  Alan  (talk) 11:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
It's just sprung into (partial) life - but for how long?  Alan  (talk) 11:50, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Even the Eurosport commentators are complaining about it on live TV.  Alan  (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

WST player template

For information: The "Fix dead links" tool does not work for any references using the WST player template. These have to be changed to normal references manually. So references to any player whose data has been deleted by WST (e.g. Liang Wenbo etc.) that use this template need to be changed.  Alan  (talk) 07:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

We shouldn't really be using the template for references, it's for the external links section for this reason. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I know that now Lee. But the problem is still there for the pages of the banned players. The external links sections for these ten players will now not work. I used the template in the List of snooker players before I realised it wasn't meant to be used that way. Zyxw has since changed all of them to proper references.  Alan  (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The List of snooker players article has been updated so all those World Snooker Tour references use {{cite web}} again. The {{WST player}} template was updated to allow an archive parameter and the pages for those 10 players were updated to display an archived WST link in the External links section. -- Zyxw (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Great work Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

2023 European Masters

For the first time that I can remember [since starting to edit this wiki], there isn't a page for the upcoming ranking tournament, with qualifiers occurring as we speak. While the lack of a live scoring system on WST may be a reason behind this, there are scores that can be put up for the matches already completed in the qualifying round using snooker.org. We don't even have a stub for this, which is also interesting. Hopefully with the season getting under way again, people will remember to create these pages [although they may be like me: lacking in any time or motivation to do this] --CitroenLover (talk) 19:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

I did up a stub for it. I have so little time right now, but it's really simple and quick to do up a stub that can be added too. This one took three minutes. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:30, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I've done a stub for the British Open if anyone would like to add to it.  Alan  (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks both, tbh it might be worth just creating a stub for every tournament that we know about so far. The UK, Masters and World Champs could do with those being made, since some information can already be posted about those [they'll be covered by BBC and Eurosport, the defending champ is whoever, the tournament format, the sponsor and so on], but less so for other events.
One of the main reasons I've avoided doing this myself, excluding the lack of time, is that simply creating a stub is a daunting process, since we need to basically search the page history for a previous edition of the tournament, copy some of the basics over and then make the page. In the time taken to do all that, someone else might've already created the page anyway. We could do with trying to simplify the process of creating snooker tournament stub pages, perhaps having a template in someones' user space that we could copy/paste for standard "tournament formats" would be a way of doing this (as well as pre-prepared drafts for all of the major tournaments, with obvious replacement text given that should be replaced when the user creates the page). -- CitroenLover (talk) 19:24, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Sounds to me like you've just given yourself a job! :-)  Alan  (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
The Shanghai Masters needs to be done. According to snooker.org it will be held at the Shanghai Grand Stage. There is very little other information available apart from the dates.  Alan  (talk) 15:42, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
The draw for the 2023 Shanghai Masters is now up on the WST site, along with additional details. https://wst.tv/ding-to-meet-si-in-shanghai/ and https://wst.tv/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Click-here-for-the-draw.pdf Steveflan (talk) 12:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Stub for 2023 Shanghai Masters has now been created Steveflan (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
I've done a stub for the English Open (qualis on 1-4 September) if anyone would like to add to it.  Alan  (talk) 08:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
> Sounds to me like you've just given yourself a job!
Indeed I have! I'll find some time to create the templates in my user space, and will let you know when they're ready. -- CitroenLover (talk) 21:15, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
I've done a stub for the Wuhan Open. It would be good if someone could confirm the actual venue. It's probably either the Wuhan Gymnasium or the Wuhan Sports Center. The information from the WST states that the venue is the "Wuhan Sports Gymnasium" which is a bit ambiguous.  Alan  (talk) 13:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
I think they're both in the same area, I would use the Sports Center since its more likely than the Gymnasium tbh. -- CitroenLover (talk) 18:39, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Just done a stub for the 2023 International Championship. Don't know the venue for this one either.  Alan  (talk) 18:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
I've put in all the qualifying matches, but the lead text needs a lot of work if somebody would like to have a go.  Alan  (talk) 07:31, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

2023 British Open

I see that we've disambiguated the article name for this event: 2023 British Open (snooker) whereas previous editions were plain e.g. 2022 British Open. I also see that 2023 British Open redirects to 2023 Open Championship (the golf). I'd prefer to use the plain name for the snooker event as previously. If anyone complains we can always start a WP:RM (perhaps we've had one before). If we leave it as it is, we need to sort out the hatnotes. We don't need one at 2023 British Open (snooker) (since it's clear from the name that it's a snooker event) but we do need one at 2023 Open Championship (since 2023 British Open would redirect there, see {{Redirect}}). Nigej (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and moved the article per WP:CONCISE. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Snookerinfo

The "Pro Snooker Blog" (snookerinfo.webs.com) has moved to https://snookerinfo.co.uk and now seems to be called Snookerinfo, so I'm assuming that the blog aspect has been abandoned. I'm assuming that the new site ought (as a rename) to be blacklisted like the old one (see MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist search for "snooker"). As some here will know I'm not mad keen on this particular blacklisting. The reality is that pretty much the only useful information on the site is the centuries list and it's clear that this list is the one used by WST and Eurosport (I await being shot down in flames when Neil Robertson makes his next century, currently on 899!). The logic of being able to use Chris Turner's list but not Adam Whatshisname's (which is a continuation of Chris's) still eludes me. Nigej (talk) 10:52, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

It's an odd one. Personally, I think there is enough proof that this is the list that is used for century breaks, but I've never been able to get anyone to actually confirm that. My thought is that this source should be deemed reliable only for the use of century breaks. However, without a plethora of sources that state this is (an) official list, I doubt we could convince anyone else that this is a reliable source as it doesn't have a editorial team, any way to deem reliability and not run by a subject matter expert who could serve as a WP:SPS. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:17, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
With the way things are going I'm not sure even WST is a reliable source. Seems that we don't have a single reliable source for any statistical information, which is pretty sorry state to be in. Nigej (talk) 12:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

September qualifier dates

The WST website gives 1 to 5 September for the Wuhan Open qualis and 6 to 8 September for the English Open qualis. Snooker.org has them the other way around, with the English on 1 to 4 September and Wuhan on 5 to 9 September. Does anybody know which is correct?  Alan  (talk) 12:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

The Morningside Arena website is consistent with the WST dates: see https://www.leicesterarena.co.uk/events/wst-wuhan-open-qualifiers and https://www.leicesterarena.co.uk/events/wst-english-open-qualifiers HurricaneHiggins (talk) 13:22, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I've changed the dates in the two stubs.  Alan  (talk) 13:55, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Century breaks

I would like to add a sentence to the Century break article to indicate, by statistics, how hard and rare (even today) a century break is. For example, in the recent Wuhan Open qualifiers there were 32 centuries made in 380 frames. Less than 10%. But I don't think I can use that kind of data as it would be deemed to be "original research". This website gives a rate of around 10% for betting purposes but I don't know if this is a reliable source. There are other websites with similar figures that use Cuetracker as a source and so can't be used. Does anybody know of any reliable sources that I could use?  Alan  (talk) 11:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I suspect it's a forlorn hope. Until WST, presumably in collaboration with https://snookerinfo.co.uk, produce something, I'm pretty sure we can't have a regular feature. Perhaps something exist for the Crucible world championship. Nigej (talk) 16:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
And "less than 10%" doesn't equate to "rare". It's like saying that a complete table run in 8- or 9-ball is "rare" because the pros do it less than 10% of the time. I don't think anyone would agree that they're rare.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:52, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
Chris Downer's Crucible Almanac, 2019 edition, which has exhaustive stats for the World Championship at the Crucible, lists the top ten players for "number of centuries per frames played" overall (ranges from 11.1% for #1 to to 8.2% for #10) and the top nine for "centuries per frames played in a single year" (ranges from 26.3% to 15%). But given how much the number of centuries has changed over the years (e.g. 10, 18 and 8 in the first three years of 32 players in Sheffield), I'm not sure that those aggregated stats mean much. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:26, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for that Benny. But I've scrapped the idea.  Alan  (talk) 06:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Point well taken, so I'll scrap that idea. Although I think it depends on your point-of-view as to whether or not centuries are "rare". I'm 77 and have played (amateur) snooker in many places around the world (India was fun) since I was about 16. I have won more frames than I have lost, and at one stage was thought of as a "pretty good" player. I have never been near to approaching a century, my highest break being in the 40s. If the top 128 players in the world can only acheive around 10%, I'd say they are rare.  Alan  (talk) 06:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
What's rare for amateur dabblers isn't of encyclopedic interst, though. Something that happens 10% of the time at the professional level is commonplace at an encylopedically pertinent level of the game. That applies to complete table clearances in pool, too. I haven't gotten a table-run in 8-ball in years – just frustratingly close many times – but that doesn't make them "rare" in a way that is of interest to encyclopedia readers. Running out 10 racks in a row would be rare, though, like doing a maximum break in snooker. Or to put it another way, unless a preponderance of the reliable sources on pro snooker say that centuries are "rare", we shouldn't use such a term.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
At a time when Ronnie O'Sullivan has made over 1,200 career centuries, three other players (Higgins, Robertson, and Trump) have made over 900 each, and both Robertson and Trump have made 100 centuries in a season, it's arguably much less of a rare achievement in the professional game that it once was. Even maximum breaks in professional tournament play are not really a rarity anymore. For sake of comparison, six-time world champion Ray Reardon made 53 career centuries!
Sure, century breaks are more of a rarity at the amateur/club level, but that's a completely different standard than elite professional play. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 16:24, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Brackets in tournament articles

The following comes out of some thoughts I've had as a result of the "Too many flags (part 2)" thread above, although I can't be regarded as anything but a novice in this area.

Nearly all our tournament articles use "brackets" for displaying the results of the knock-out stages. Historically we used a large number of different templates for these, like {{16TeamBracket-Compact-NoSeeds-Byes}}. These were originally completely different templates but in recent years (behind the screens) they've been changed into wrappers for a few "modules". There are two main modules: Module:Team bracket, which is the longwinded one which uses keywords like RD1-team1, and there's Module:RoundN which uses positional parameters. (Module:Team bracket has a variant Module:Build bracket for complex situations but how much we use it I'm not sure). We've probably used Module:Team bracket more than Module:RoundN, partly because it provided a "seed" column, which is not possible with Module:RoundN, and partly because editors just got used to its style.

The point of my post is that if we go down the route of removing flags from round 2 onwards (round 3 sometimes) then the approach of using the "team-width" parameter to specify the column width is not ideal. Really we'd want the round 1 column (and perhaps 2) to be wider and later rounds to be smaller. Module:Team bracket mentions the use of "team-width=auto" and it seems to me that it would sensible for us to go down that route rather that specifying a width. "team-width=auto" also seems to work in Module:RoundN although it's not advertised. (in both cases it seems that anything that's not a number works, not just "auto") Have a play at 2023 European Masters#Main draw to see what happens. One change is that where we have two different brackets, one after the other, then the two do not line up ("Top half" and "Bottom half" would not line up in this example), but personally that's not an issue for me. Nigej (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Just tried the "auto" width in the 2023 European Masters main draw and it seems to work quite well. It might need a bit of "tweaking" though because of the Thai players with really long names. Don't know how we could line up the top and bottom halves.  Alan  (talk) 17:05, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
The trouble is that there's been too much "tweaking" over the years. Everyone wants to tweak it to look good on their own device. The reality is that half the people are looking at it on their mobile phones anyway, and the other half are using a vast number of different-shaped devices/screens, different Wikipedia settings, different browsers, different character sizes/fonts, etc etc. As to the lining up, I'm happy with them not doing so, after all we're not in the beauty contest business. and of course we don't have to use "auto" everywhere. Nigej (talk) 17:14, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
I can't say I'm too bothered about the lining up either, but the long Thai names bother me. I tried using "nowrap" on them in one tournament but you reverted that saying there had been a previous discussion about it, although I haven't seen it. An alternative approach would be to use N. Saengkham instead of Noppon Saengkham for example. I used M. Phetmalaikul instead of Manasawin Phetmalaikul in the recent Wuhan Open Qualifiers and nobody objected (yet).  Alan  (talk) 18:09, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
See MOS:NOWRAP. "it may be counterproductive in a table (where an unattractive break may be acceptable to conserve precious horizontal space". In other words, who's to say that it wouldn't be better for some readers if it did wrap? I'd much rather go for your other option, see eg 2023 US Open – Men's singles#Top half which uses initials (rather than forenames) "to conserve precious horizontal space". Nigej (talk) 18:22, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
If we were to go down that path, and use R. O'Sullivan for example, then the Chinese players are a problem. Looking at the tennis, and doing it their way, we would have J. Ding for Ding Junhui and I don't much like that. I would prefer Ding J. Alternatively, we could just do it for the long named Thai players as mentioned above, and one or two others like Ishpreet Singh Chadha.  Alan  (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
I wasn't thinking of the whole lot, just those names that "stick out". As you say it seems to be mostly the Thai names. at the moment. Nigej (talk) 18:59, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
OK - I just did that for Thepchaiya Un-Nooh and Noppon Saengkham in the 2023 European Masters. I think that looks OK.  Alan  (talk) 19:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
A width of 220 should generally work in the draw template and its fine to allow player names to word wrap if they’re too long. Using auto widths or the nowrap template creates a relatively poor mobile user experience, because what ends up happening is that the first round gets made extremely wide to accommodate long names, leading to the rest of the template to be very narrow and impossible to read, and the latter should be avoided for that reason. — CitroenLover (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Since I don't have a "smartphone" I can't check this. Please take a look at what I've done in the 2023 European Masters on your mobile and let me know if it works OK. It looks alright on my laptop.  Alan  (talk) 08:28, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
You must be the last person in the Western world with no smartphone! :-) I just checked this on mine and it looks fine. The only thing that looks slightly awkward is that Ishpreet Singh Chadha is spread over three lines in the last-64 column. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 10:45, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Well if I am that's something to be proud of. I was going to "initialise" Ishpreet anyway. Thanks for the input.  Alan  (talk) 10:49, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
I've changed Ishpreet. How does it look now?  Alan  (talk) 11:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Looks much better! Thank you! HurricaneHiggins (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason we’ve just unilaterally decided to abbreviate people’s names without consensus? WST don’t do it, nor do any other reputable/official sources, so why have we done that? Full names should be used throughout the draw, until an official source changes the standard. The quoted tennis article for a style formatting suggestion was quoted inappropriately in this context: the draw used on tennis tournaments uses abbreviated names for everyone, not full names, hence why they were used on the US open as that is following an official standard set by their tour; this wasn’t done because the tennis wikipedians decided to follow some inane style guideline. CitroenLover (talk) 12:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
I've just been using the 2023 European Masters as a test while this discussion is ongoing. Feel free to revert all of my edits if they annoy you.  Alan  (talk) 12:30, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi, don’t worry they don’t annoy me haha. Just concerned it can look like a decision was made if the edits are done in mainspace. If you’d like to test, it may be more appropriate to do so in a sandbox under your user page [eg Special:MyPage/Sandbox/somepagenamehere], which makes it easier to distinguish that its a personal change needing discussion than a policy change. :D CitroenLover (talk) 12:33, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
You are absolutely correct about testing in mainspace, so I've reverted my edits in the 2023 European Masters and will carry on working in my sandbox until some consensus is reached on these two controversial issues (I'm not holding my breath).  Alan  (talk) 10:36, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Back to dealing with Thai players with really long names, how about doing this:
which uses {{abbr|[[Manasawin Phetmalaikul|M. Phetmalaikul]]|Manasawin Phetmalaikul}} and seems to work.  Alan  (talk) 19:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Oops - that only works properly if you have "Enable page previews" switched OFF.  Alan  (talk) 19:28, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
I don’t think its too much of a problem. Some Thai players have, over time, opted to use a nickname which is officially used by WST: see Mink Nutcharut and Sunny Akani as obvious examples. If a player opts to use a nickname and its used by the tour, then we can simply use that in place of their lengthier name. Otherwise, we should generally just use the long name as is, without really altering it for display purposes. — CitroenLover (talk) 22:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Unclear wording at Steve Davis

Could someone please take "Despite being seeded 63rd of 64, he converted an 8-2 deficit to 2 seed and reigning world champion Efren Reyes into a 9-8 victory." and make it make better sense?  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  12:08, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

The sentence makes sense to me, although it could be worded better, to indicate that the 9-8 victory was in the earlier round of 64. Anyway, you could always improve it yourself. WP:BOLD applies.  Alan  (talk) 08:56, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Never mind, I fixed it with punctuation and such; I had to read it about five times to even parse it as a proper sentence, but maybe hard-core followers of snooker would have parsed it naturally and easily because it's in their jargon. But part of the problem was the "8–2" was backwards; Davis was the 2 not the 8. And another was using two different formats to refer to seed positions. The sensible version: Despite being seeded 63rd of 64, he converted an 2–8 deficit (to 2nd seed and reigning world champion Efren Reyes) into a 9–8 victory.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:10, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
That's better. But it's Pool not Snooker.  Alan  (talk) 09:18, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
I know, but it was written by snooker-focused editors using snooker lingo (it's primarily a snooker biography). :-)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
I edited the paragraph to the following, which I hope is clear:
"At the 2000 WPA World Nine-ball Championship, Davis was seeded 63rd. In the round of 64, he trailed second seed and reigning world champion Efren Reyes 2–8, but won the match 9–8. He defeated two other former world champions, Ralf Souquet 9–6 in the last 32 and Kunihiko Takahashi 11–6 in the last 16, but lost 7–11 in the quarter-finals to Corey Deuel."
I removed the statement that Davis defeated the three previous world champions because it is incorrect. Reyes won the title in 1999, and Takahashi in 1998, but the 1997 title was won by Johnny Archer, whom Davis did not defeat at the 2000 event. Souquet was the winner in 1996. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 10:22, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

IP users updating scores mid match

Last night there were a number of updates by four different IP users in the 2023 British Open tournament, where they were putting in mid-match scores. I had logged out by that time and so couldn't revert them. In any case, I might have broken the WP:3RR rule. So I have left messages on the four IP users talk pages. Is there a better way of putting a stop to this?  Alan  (talk) 11:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

We can put up a WP:edit notice, but they're unlikely to stop it. Informing users is the best way, with reverting. Quoting WP:LIVESCORES Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: An edit notice might do the trick. Since I'm not an administrator, could you please put one on the British Open, and the upcoming English Open and Wuhan Open tournaments. They can't do any harm.  Alan  (talk) 13:27, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Surprisingly, I just had an apology from one of the four IP users!  Alan  (talk) 15:33, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Snooker/Archives/2023/September&oldid=1192290351"