Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Masters (snooker)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Although there is possibly a very week 'keep' based on strength of arguments, I'm closing this as 'no consensus' (which defaults to 'keep') because the nominator clearly proposed 'merging'. Hence this is the wrong venue for a discussion on this issue. I recommend starting a merge discussion per: WP:MERGE. (see also Template:Merge Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:08, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

European Masters (snooker)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I propose merging this content to European Open (snooker) and redirecting this page to that article, since evidence points to the fact that the "European Masters" is simply a rebranded entry in the European open series.

World Snooker has a history of rebranding tournaments as can be seen at List of snooker tournaments. For example, the European Open itself was branded as the "Malta Cup" while hosted in Malta. In this particular case there is plenty of evidence suggesting that the European Masters is just a revised instance of the European Open.


 * The article detailing the "European Masters" can be found at http://www.worldsnooker.com/tournaments/european-championship-2016/ (note it is catalogued under the European Championship name)
 * As can be seen on the calendar, World Snooker use "European Championship" and "European Open" interchangeably (see the October entry and the heading for that section)
 * The url http://www.worldsnooker.com/tournaments/european-open-2016/ (note the open) directs to the article detailing the European Masters.

It appears obvious to me that the European Masters is just a branding for the European Open and I don't think it is necessary to have a completely separate article for it. In fact, I think it is counter-productive because it splits the lineage over more than one article which is at odds with how the snooker tournament articles document rebranded versions of the same event. Betty Logan (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Against the deletion Why... It's only a supposition that it's the former European Open! Your supposition. Previously it had this URL http://www.worldsnooker.com/tournaments/european-open-2016/ but since then it has this URL http://www.worldsnooker.com/tournaments/european-championship-2016/. It was called European Championship first, then European Masters. European Masters is the official name now and until they don't say it is the former European Open which died 8 years ago under rebranding (Malta Cup), we should have a separated article. NOWHERE, BUT NOWHERE on the internet it's written that European Masters is the former European Open. Just a URL we have, and this URL is now European Championship. Why wouldn't have they use the European Open if you think you are right? Why European Masters instead of European Open? Because it was subsequently rebranded into Malta Cup. Romania/Bucharest doesn't want to use this name, therefore it would have been used that European Open title. I don't think it's the old European Open since there is no declaration about this. I suggest to leave this way, separated page, and if we have a clear source about this to redirect it. Wikipedia is not about suppositions. MOREOVER, according to http://www.worldsnooker.com/tournaments/european-championship-2016/, this event didn't have before a champion. Current champions: NONE. Shaun Murphy was the last winner of the European Open: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Open_(snooker). So clearly, the European Masters isn't the former European Open. Leave it this way until we get an official statement. Creepy pasta (talk) 18:34, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I am worried about your real intentions since that calendar is old. The tournament is not anymore hosted by Cluj-Napoca, but by Bucharest. http://www.worldsnooker.com/full-calendar/ It says EUROPEAN MASTERS. Creepy pasta (talk) 18:34, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * It is obviously not a supposition when World Snooker use the terms "European Championship" and "European Open" on their own calendar (published at the start of the current season incidentally) to describe the event which is now called the European Masters (currently hosted at a url which references it as the European Championship). All you've actually established is that the name has changed, not that it's an entirely different event, and it still has the same promoters and is in the same country. Furthermore, it is World Snooker and not me who uses the url http://www.worldsnooker.com/tournaments/european-open-2016/ to link to the article about the event. It is clear that World Snooker use the names as synonyms for the event, without any supposition on my part. Betty Logan (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Imo how can you link to the European Open without any declaration? Without anything written on the site? It's your supposition. Wikipedia shouldn't offer false info. Practically you are giving false info, the people will believe it, and after then if you find out it isn't the European Open you accept the mistake by correct it. You should leave this way, do not link it to the European Open. There is no source on the internet USING THE WORD REBRANDED EUROPEAN OPEN. You simply invented it. FOR GOD'S SAKE, WHAT HAS EUROPEAN CHAMPIONSHIP TO DO WITH EUROPEAN OPEN? You said it! We have World Snooker Championship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Snooker_Championship and World Open https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_World_Open_(snooker). Two different competitions, but we also have Masters: Shanghai Masters, Riga Masters. It's only your supposition. That European Open URL was used, now it's European Championship. It seems they didn't agree with the name. In the end, it was European Masters, not even European Championship. That URL is also wrong. There is nothing written that this is part of the European Open lineage. Nothing. Just old URL and old calendar with mistakes. Nothing really official doesn't say that. Only European Championship URL and European Masters written on the calendar. Creepy pasta (talk) 18:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The difference is is that World Snooker don't use the World Championship and the World Open as synonyms on their calendar. Neither does the link for the World Open take you to the page about the world championship. Betty Logan (talk) 17:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * This is complete crap. Can you guarantee this is the European Open? Are you 100% sure? Please be fair. Show us a source where they say Malta Cup (ex-known as the European Open) is called now the European Masters. We should have different pages, and please leave it "defunct" the European Open. Until it's proved. I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU AT ALL! We shouldn't speculate. Leave my article alone. Do no say Malta Cup/European Open is back after 8 years when we have no announcement. I don't agree to link it, because you could offer false info to the visitors of Wikipedia. Creepy pasta (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * But there was an announcement. All the early press referred to the event as the "European Open". Even Mark Selby (the world number 1) has it listed as the European Open on his own personal calendar: http://www.mark-selby.cz/index.php?nid=4549&lid=cs&oid=4928547. It is only recently the name has changed to the "European Masters", but it still occupies the same slot, is still being held in the same country and is still being promoted by the same people. Since I am not affiliated to World Snooker I cannot guarantee it is a rebranding of the event any more than you can guarantee it is not. But World Snooker's own calendar and web page titling indicate that this is a rebranding (most likely precipiated by sponsorship) rather than a completely new event. But as it stands I believe the evidence favors my position; if it turns out to be an incorrect poistion then it is easy enough to split the article. Betty Logan (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. There is no proposal to delete anything here, but a suggestion of how our content should be organised. That needs to be thrashed out on article talk pages or at the snooker wikiproject, not discussed here. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The article will cease to exist as an article. This isn't just a case of moving a bit of content across a couple of articles. Betty Logan (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You proposed merging this article with another one and redirecting. That doesn't need an admin to press the "delete" button, so no AfD discussion is needed. I'm not commenting here on the rights or wrongs of your position, but simply pointing out that this is an issue that should be decided elsewhere. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even assuming this tournament is not a straight rebranding of the European Open, there is still absolutely no point in having a separate article, since they are the only ranking tournaments so far containing the word "European" in their names, and are very similar overall. Vinitsky14  ( talk ) 10:09, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. The contract signed for three years.  The event will be promoted by McCann/Thiess for the next three years. 95.133.211.190 (talk) 11:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * This argument is not relevant to the point of the discussion. The sponsorship of the tournament does not necesserily determine whether it is the continuation/rebranding of the previous ones. Vinitsky14  ( talk ) 12:24, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as there's still not enough substantial information, let alone coverage, to suggest we can currently accept this as its own article. SwisterTwister   talk  00:13, 18 September 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.