Talk:2019–20 snooker season

Date format in Calendar tables
Can I get some input on the date format used in the Calendar table in this article (and the articles for previous seasons). I note there is a footnote next to the header in the Date column, defining the choice of date style, however this in contravention of Wikipedia guidelines on date formats. MOS:DATESNO specifically outlines the date format used in these articles as unacceptable, and provides examples of acceptable alternatives (particularly for use in tables/abbreviated format). Taken in conjunction with guidance at WP:DATEOVER, I would suggest that e.g. "9 May" would be the most appropriate format for these tables. The current format is ambiguous (as demonstrated by the need for a footnote) and the Wikipedia guidelines exist to prevent this ambiguity. Mato (talk) 19:35, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Prize Money Indian Open
Will there be an Indian Open and if no, why is it listed in the prize money list?--BigPig (talk) 17:08, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Dates for Seniors Tour events
Some events on the Seniors tour have moved to different dates. I recently edited these on the calendar to new dates, but I see they were changed back to the old, incorrect dates. Why? Seniors Irish Masters, from January to March: https://seniorsnooker.com/2019/07/18/rokit-seniors-irish-masters-2020-new-dates/

Seniors Masters to May: https://www.alexandrapalace.com/whats-on/rokit-phones-com-world-seniors-masters-snooker/

Color coding of the Seniors 6-Red World Championship
The tournament is a variant event belonging to the World Seniors Tour. So which color code to chose for it? This is of course a matter of opinion, and I guess it should be resolved through consensus. My opinion is, that all the WST events should have the same color, in order to provide an overview of the tournaments on that tour. Otherwise the color coding kind of loses its meaning. I'm sure a case can be made for the opposite conclusion. This is just my opinion. (An alternative solution could be the color yellow for the event, and then the color for VE in the cell with the name of the tournament. Though this might look a bit odd.) Mrloop (talk) 11:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the colours have a few issues, with WP:ACCESS and them currently being used for non-defining categories. Realistically, if we keep the colours, the Seniors Tour should take precedence. As should the ranking event on the snooker-shoot out. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski  (talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Mrloop (talk) 19:24, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Exactly what. it is a 6red event exactly like the other six red event which is a varient.

-The other six-red event is a variant event to the main tour. A variant event on the Seniors tour, should still primarily be shown as a Seniors event, or using a mix of the two highlight colours to show it's both a Seniors event and a variant event.

you missing the point they are both variant events and should be colour coded the same. you cant just say stick it in yellow because it's seniors.it is a seniors variant event.someone may add it in error as a non-ranking event as it would not stand out as a variant if it is yellow.

-It can be highlighted as both yellow and variant (two colours used), but you didn't like that, and you vandalised the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 07:21, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * IP user - please sign your posts with ~ . It's hardly vandalism. I don't really see why we seperate out variant events on here at all really. It being a variant only effects the rules, not how the tour works. I think we'd be better to remove the colours entirely than to use two for one field. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree with Lee, colour coding the variant events just causes confusion. There is only one other VE in the list anyway. Remove VE colour altogether, then the Seniors 6-reds will just be yellow like the other Seniors events. You really should be conducting your disagreement here and not via edit summaries and repeated edit warring so please stop. Rodney Baggins (talk) 11:04, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * To be fair, to make a change like that, as it would be unilaterally used for previous articles, it would probably be best to get some more input at WP:SNOOKER/WP:CUE. I agree though, I'm not sure why we ever gave it additional colours. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I would argue that if anything, the WR events should be coloured as they are "more important" than the NR events. Then NR, VE, TE (at the very least) should not be coloured at all. And yes any changes to the colour coding would have to be retrospectively applied to the historical articles too. Rodney Baggins (talk) 15:28, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

-The new colour scheme layout (as of 1st December 2019) looks horrible and is not in conformity with past seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 22:49, 1 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk)

The colour scheme in which the seniors events stand out like yellow beacons is completely stupid in my view. The eye is drawn to these, giving the impression that these are the most important events when actually they are the least important. It would make more sense to have the ranking events as yellow beacons. Nigej (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The Seniors events don't have to be yellow beacons, but I believe the ranking events should not be highlighted as these are the "normal" events of the season, and the majority of the season are ranking events, so should just be plain white. Highlighting the majority item on a list seems pretty silly to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 21:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should have two tables: one for the important events and one for the mickey mouse events like the seniors. Nigej (talk) 21:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've thought about that as well. Seems like a good idea. Mrloop (talk) 21:15, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

i agree with 86.42.85.52 leave the colours as they are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.176.27 (talk) 00:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"Edit warring"
I took the issue of the colors in the calendar to the talk page. There seems to be a consensus – amongst the very few people caring about the page.. – that the calendar needed fewer colors. I then made a new color scheme and in the process gave the main tour ranking tournaments a color instead of having them in white. Also per suggestion here on the talk page. The precise decisions on preferred colors is not that important, I think. But there are too many colors ind the calendar, and some of them are even conflicting. Someone without even having a wiki profile keeps working against the consensus. You can call it edit warring all you want, but when the issue has been resolved on the talk page, it seems like vandalizing to keep changing it. Mrloop (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It is a terrible mish-mash, the yellow beacons being the worst aspect. Compare with Snooker season 1999/2000, three neutral colours. Nigej (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I take it that you agree then, that the calendar needs fewer colors. But I might, of course, be wrong in my assessment. Mrloop (talk) 21:53, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There was no consensus, Mrloop. I, not having a wiki profile has nothing to do with your argument. Clearly, there was no consensus, hence this debate. Separate tables defeats the propose of a CALENDAR list, which is suppose to list events as they happen in the season. Again, any changes would have to be made also to ALL previous seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Certainly true. I still quite like the idea of two (or more) tables. One with the important events: ranking events, Masters, Champion of Champions, plus probably Shanghai Masters and Paul Hunter Classic and perhaps the Championship League, and one (perhaps more) table(s) for the rest. Nigej (talk) 22:09, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Nigej everybody is happy with the snooker colour coding apart from mrloop.leave them alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.176.27 (talk) 00:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure who this "everyone" is of who you speak, but it's a disaster currently. I agree with Nigej, that it would be better to put this into different tables for different tours.


 * Currently we have a weird mis-match in that we have no amateur events on the calendar at all. I suggest one for ranking events, one for non-ranking, one for seniors, and one for amateur/women's. This gets rid of the colours entirely Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * It's a Snooker SEASON calendar, not a Snooker TOUR(S) calendar. One calendar, to list all the events. And there are amateur events already on the calendar, what do you think the challenge tour is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * There was no consensus, Mrloop. I, not having a wiki profile has nothing to do with your argument. Clearly, there was no consensus, hence this debate. Separate tables defeats the propose of a CALENDAR list, which is suppose to list events as they happen in the season. Again, any changes would have to be made also to ALL previous seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Seems to me that we have one person wanting the multi colour/yellow beacon style and everyone else thinks it's terrible. BTW: Lee Vilenski is not the same person as MrLoop. Nigej (talk) 08:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I know Lee Vilenski is not MrLoop. BTW: 89.204.176.27 is not the same person as 86.42.85.52, so there's more than one person disagreeing here. Once AGAIN, the Seniors events don't have to be "yellow beacon", I'm not simply arguing for the "yellow beacon" colour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:51, 3 December 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk)
 * I'm no expert on IP addresses but it's a bit strange to me that all the supporters of the multi-colour/yellow beacon style are IP users having IP addresses from Ireland. Nigej (talk) 09:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm no expert on IP addresses either, but two Snooker fans editing Wikipedia articles from a country of over six million people is not really strange. 86.42.85.52 is me, and my stance is not simply pro-"yellow beacon". I'm against highlighting World Ranking events, and/or having multiple calendar lists for all the tours.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 09:46, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * However, see WP:MEATPUPPET: "In votes or vote-like discussions, new users may be disregarded or given significantly less weight, especially if there are many of them expressing the same opinion." and "For the purpose of dispute resolution when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets." Nigej (talk) 12:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm on mobile now, so I know it will take too long to do, but is probably worth checking at WP:SPI. We really shouldn't be promoting professional snooker as the only events that exist, otherwise we should change the titles of these to "professional snooker season...". The colours currently have some WP:ACCESS issues, and having multiple colours for one event is a severe case of cruft. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:55, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

In summary: The general view is that there is there is no point in having the VE category. The one dissenter is an IP user (or group of related IP users - who would still only count as one vote). The VE category seems to have been first used in the 2008/09 season so there would be 11 seasons to change. The 2008/09 article did not have the VE category until 7 November 2017‎ when it was added by an IP user. Nigej (talk) 08:43, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Calendar section
My proposal for the "Calendar" section is that there should be three tables:

1. A table for events which the main tour players play in. The current table is already headed "The following table outlines the dates and results for all the ranking and major invitational events." so I think this reflects what this table was originally meant to be. 2. A table for the Challenge Tour 2019/2020. Actually there is already a perfectly good table there, so this is perhaps unnecessary, a link would be enough. 3. A table for the Seniors events.

A further table could be added later for other important "amateur" events like the IBSF World Snooker Championship. I would further propose that the Challenge Tour and Seniors tables do not have any colour coding. The tables will be quite short and colour coding will not be needed. Nigej (talk) 07:22, 4 December 2019 (UTC) (User 86.42.85.52 has now changed the heading I quoted above, but what I wrote was correct at the time Nigej (talk) 08:24, 4 December 2019 (UTC))


 * Strongly disagree with this change. The calendar is supposed to be a comprehensive list of the entire Snooker season, not separate calendars for the pro tour, amateur events, and Seniors tour, etc. Separate tables defeats the purpose of an inclusive CALENDAR. Again, like other changes, this multiple tables idea would also have to be applied to previous seasons for overall conformity. This change is not needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I like this idea. We have too many items to just have a list like this. Historically there has only been few recognised tournaments, and we have been begging out for a 2019 in Snooker in a WP:SPLIT article for ages (see 2019 in sports for the reasons. The fact that we completely ignore events like the 2019 Women's World Snooker Championship is the worst kind of prejudice. I would one day be interested in promoting this to GA/FL but without this change, we'd fail on WP:BROAD and ACCESS reasons. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:41, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * We could just add women's Snooker events to the calendar? How active are they going to be? The Challenge Tour event pages are not created/full results/etc., for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 12:58, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 3 January 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved to format "1968–69 snooker season". (non-admin closure) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

– As per conversation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2020/March, I can't see a reason for the dates to be at the end of the titles, as they are always piped when being cited. I propose the move of all of these such articles to be more consistent, and usable as base links. As it is over 50 pages, I've done a formal RM. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:01, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Snooker season 2019/2020 → 2019/2020 snooker season
 * snooker season 2018/2019 → 2018/2019 snooker season
 * snooker season 2017/2018 → 2017/2018 snooker season
 * snooker season 2016/2017 → 2016/2017 snooker season
 * snooker season 2015/2016 → 2015/2016 snooker season
 * snooker season 2014/2015 → 2014/2015 snooker season
 * snooker season 2013/2014 → 2013/2014 snooker season
 * snooker season 2012/2013 → 2012/2013 snooker season
 * snooker season 2011/2012 → 2011/2012 snooker season
 * snooker season 2010/2011 → 2010/2011 snooker season
 * Snooker season 2009/2010 → 2009/2010 snooker season
 * snooker season 2008/2009 → 2008/2009 snooker season
 * snooker season 2007/2008 → 2007/2008 snooker season
 * snooker season 2006/2007 → 2006/2007 snooker season
 * snooker season 2005/2006 → 2005/2006 snooker season
 * snooker season 2004/2005 → 2004/2005 snooker season
 * snooker season 2003/2004 → 2003/2004 snooker season
 * snooker season 2002/2003 → 2002/2003 snooker season
 * snooker season 2001/2002 → 2001/2002 snooker season
 * snooker season 2000/2001 → 2000/2001 snooker season
 * Snooker season 1999/2000 → 1999/2000 snooker season
 * snooker season 1998/1999 → 1998/1999 snooker season
 * snooker season 1997/1998 → 1997/1998 snooker season
 * snooker season 1996/1997 → 1996/1997 snooker season
 * snooker season 1995/1996 → 1995/1996 snooker season
 * snooker season 1994/1995 → 1994/1995 snooker season
 * snooker season 1993/1994 → 1993/1994 snooker season
 * snooker season 1992/1993 → 1992/1993 snooker season
 * snooker season 1991/1992 → 1991/1992 snooker season
 * snooker season 1990/1991 → 1990/1991 snooker season
 * Snooker season 1989/1990 → 1989/1990 snooker season
 * snooker season 1988/1989 → 1988/1989 snooker season
 * snooker season 1987/1988 → 1987/1988 snooker season
 * snooker season 1986/1987 → 1986/1987 snooker season
 * snooker season 1985/1986 → 1985/1986 snooker season
 * snooker season 1984/1985 → 1984/1985 snooker season
 * snooker season 1983/1984 → 1983/1984 snooker season
 * snooker season 1982/1983 → 1982/1983 snooker season
 * snooker season 1981/1982 → 1981/1982 snooker season
 * snooker season 1980/1981 → 1980/1981 snooker season
 * Snooker season 1979/1980 → 1979/1980 snooker season
 * snooker season 1978/1979 → 1978/1979 snooker season
 * snooker season 1977/1978 → 1977/1978 snooker season
 * snooker season 1976/1977 → 1976/1977 snooker season
 * snooker season 1975/1976 → 1975/1976 snooker season
 * snooker season 1974/1975 → 1974/1975 snooker season
 * snooker season 1973/1974 → 1973/1974 snooker season
 * snooker season 1972/1973 → 1972/1973 snooker season
 * snooker season 1971/1972 → 1971/1972 snooker season
 * snooker season 1970/1971 → 1970/1971 snooker season
 * snooker season 1969/1970 → 1969/1970 snooker season
 * snooker season 1968/1969 → 1968/1969 snooker season
 * Support per nom. It would be consistent with other sports - like NBA, Association football, Hockey, Rugby etc, all starting with the dates. --Less Unless (talk) 21:22, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If moved, per MOS:DATERANGE these should be en-dashes rather than slashes and because they are consecutive years they can be shortened as well (e.g. 1968–69 snooker season). Dekimasu よ! 06:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support for consistency with other sports. Also agree with Dekimasu about the MOS requirement for the date range. Cf. 2019–20 figure skating season. However, this would have repercussions in all the snooker articles that mention/link the season as I think we've generally used year fwd-slash year (e.g. 2019/2020) in article text. Rodney Baggins (talk) 08:05, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. As above my only issue is whether we should be using the 1968–69 snooker season style which seems to used elsewhere in sports. A quick look through Category:Sports seasons by sport comes up with 2019–20 FA Cup, 2019–20 Sheffield Shield season, 2019–20 curling season, 2019–20 Handball-Bundesliga, 2019–20 Baltic Men Volleyball League and thousands of others. I didn't find a single 2019/2020 or 2019/20 style article name. When moved we would have a redirect so that the old links would still work. Nigej (talk) 08:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It absolutely should be an ndash, and not a slash, IMO – so it should be moved to 1968–69 snooker season, etc. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. This kind of requested move is definitely appropriate in this case. --Comment by Selfie City ( talk about my  contributions ) 12:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. Move all to alternate format, 1968–69 snooker season etc. 195.5.28.38 (talk) 13:06, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support all as proposed. MOS:DATERANGE explicitly says that "The slash notation (2005/2006) may be used to signify a fiscal year or other special period, if that convention is used in reliable sources.", which is the case here. Armbrust The Homunculus 19:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Move all to alternate format, 1968–69 snooker season etc. Sports seasons are almost always styled with an en-dash on Wikipedia and it looks odd and inconsistent for these to use a slash, even if some sources do that. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

2019–20 snooker season?
IP 86.42.85.52 keeps trying to put "snooker season" in caps in opening sentence of lead. He/she started a new Talk page section earlier today saying Why isn't it "2019–20 Snooker Season" with capitalized words, like many other sport season wiki pages? Like, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_EFL_League_One, for example? but then deleted the question and just proceeded to start an edit war on the main page instead. Huh? Nigej has been valiantly trying to explain via edit summaries why caps are not needed. To reiterate, "snooker season" in this context is just a generic term for a period of time over which snooker matches are played and cannot be seen as a proper noun as it does not refer to a specific tournament or event. Apart from anything else, if "snooker season" were meant to be in caps, then the article title would be in caps and surely that would have been picked up in the recent move discussion!! IP is simply editing the bold reiteration in the first sentence which should clearly match the article title... Note to IP 86.42.85.52: if you were to register as a proper Wiki editor, then we could address you directly and have proper grown-up conversations about these things. Presumably the example you have given, 2019–20 EFL League One, is refering to the "2019–20 EFL League One football season" to give it its full name, where the "football season" would not be in caps for the same reason that "snooker season" does not need to be in caps here. To make a direct comparison, our full title might be "2019–20 World Snooker Tour snooker season". All the best. Rodney Baggins (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's the thing, it's not a proper noun. I would suggest it's just the IP being confused. If it escalates, then we can deal with RPP. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:47, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've put in for a WP:RFP. Nigej (talk) 18:53, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Opening line?
The opening line of the article states, "The 2019–20 snooker season is a series of professional snooker tournaments being played between 9 May 2019 and 4 May 2020.", but then the calendar lists senior and amateur events, some that end after "4 May 2020". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:09, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Clearly the dates needs changing. The issue with the word "professional" is more complex. In snooker circles, there seems to be a bizarre use of the term "professional" to mean the main tour when clearly events like the challenge and senior tours are "professional" in the normal sense of the word (ie there is significant prize money, see Professional sports). Somehow we need to clarify which use of the word we are talking about since we will have many readers unaware of the strange snooker usage of the word. Probably best to avoid using professional/amateur. Nigej (talk) 08:35, 16 January 2020 (UTC)


 * the solution is no colours, and for the items to be split into thier corresponding articles... Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:10, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Bright yellow for seniors events
As ever we have an edit war with seemingly just one IP editor wanting the bright yellow beacon style for seniors events. Is there a solution or are we going to give up? Nigej (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Seniors events at the end of the season
The Seniors Irish Masters that was due to played at the end of March, has moved to July 31-August 1 2020, because of the coronavirus. I've moved the event to the bottom of the calendar, after the Seniors Masters in May and the Seniors 6 Red World Championship in June. But maybe the July/August event would now be considered part of next season, 2020-21? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.85.52 (talk) 08:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

2020 China Open: postponed or cancelled?
The article says it was cancelled, but there are no references. I have not found any source for that assertion, just that it was postponed indefinitely. I have seen the word "cancelled" used in this context when describing the 2020 China Open, but only regarding what had been scheduled. 73.81.116.35 (talk) 00:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Starting paragraphs
I feel like the starting paragraphs highlighting what has happened in the season needs to be rewritten in a way that it only includes important details of the season, like records, important changes and crucial events; now it looks like a long list of things that has happened to the season (for example, I think first time ranking event winners should not be included as highlights). Alternatively, we can also delete the "results" paragraph, or wait until the World Snooker Awards has been held and then write such a paragraph to conform to the consistency of the snooker season pages of past seasons. --Ui56k (talk) 13:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand the proposal. The WP:LEDE is a summary of a subject. I'm not sure how deleting information to wait for snooker awards is particularly suitable. We are still during the season, having some information is better than no information. We really should have a "season summary" section detailing the results, news and such but I've been putting off writing it. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)