Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker/Archives/2021/June

Requested move at Talk:1985 Kit Kat Break for World Champions
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:1985 Kit Kat Break for World Champions that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 20:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Accessibility issue with performance and ranking timeline?
See Featured_article_candidates/Steve_Davis/archive1. Looks like we should probably change the format of the performance and ranking timeline, if my inexpert reading of that is right. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * To meet MOS:ACCESS we should really meet AAA requirements. Basically our #CCC (and #CCCCCC) should be changed to #555555. Very easy to do - I can change it across all of our articles, but just want to get some confirmation there isn't a more suitable colour. This is currently in place at Steve Davis, so let me know what you think. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:06, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I've done a sample edit . Let me know what you think. I can run through the remainder on AWB. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:34, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been WP:BOLD and started the process. Let me know for errors. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * #555555 on #EFEFEF meets AA but not AAA for normal text, according to the checker I used (link). However, my reading is that it's OK for MOS:COLOR. Thanks, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:07, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The accessibility review used ##F8F9FA as a background. I know nothing about this at all though. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hmm. We actually have lots of different background colours used in these tables (in Davis's article for example), and I think the shading of the row and column headers comes from the wikitable template. I have no knowledge to add, but will note that the changes you're making are definitely an improvement. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 15:12, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Should a qualifying event be included in a list of a player's career finals?
Hi, an IP editor has added "1953 News of the World Snooker Tournament Qualifying Event" to the list of finals at Rex Williams. I'm not sure that, as a qualifying event, this should be included. Views? Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely not - a qualifying event is not a "finals." P-K3 (talk) 12:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

It should be included as the Benson and Hedges Championship and The Masters Qualifying Event is included here and is counted on the Chris Turner Snooker Archive and other sites. It is a qualifying event and it has a final yes it should be included. However obviously QSchool which has multiple qualifiers would not be counted for example 178.167.135.207 (talk) 13:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think these should be included. I'd argue the same for the Masters qualifying event. If the events sole purpose is to allow someone to compete in another tournament, that's not enough to be considered a professional tournament. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Lee that is your opinion and we all have them, but statisticians like Chris Turner, Clive Everton, Dave Hendon etc do count the Masters Qualifying Event as a professional tournament. It is included in their titles and century break statistics. It is wrong to just make up rules to what we believe. If statisticians count them they should be counted on Wikipedia. 178.167.135.207 (talk) 13:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

By the way check the list of maximum breaks that have been made in the tournament and they are all on the official list of 147's with the tournament listed. For example Stuart Bingham's 147 is listed in the Masters Qualifying Event and it counts as a professional official 147. It was a professional event.There were so many professionals back then it was a way into the Masters. Like how the WPBSA Open Tour and Challenge Tour were professional events then, they would be amateur today as the tour has changed. 178.167.135.207 (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Century breaks are always counted in qualifying events Dooks...Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:43, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

I think you are missing the point the Masters Qualifying Event was a professional tournament in its own right which had a final to decide the winner. It was a professional event as it counted the century breaks and 147's which are rightly on the official list. As I said above it is used and referenced by all statisticians. 178.167.135.207 (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * How is it any different from any other tournament qualifying, other than one person progressed rather than multiple? Do any sources say the list of finals Rex was in, and include this qualifying event? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Generally I'd don't think they should be included. Whether there is 1 qualifier of 2 or 16 doesn't make any difference to me. The argument that because there was 1 qualifier it is to treated as a separate event but if there had been 2 qualifiers if wouldn't have been, seem to me to be a very bizarre argument. The only exception would be if it was a genuinely separate tournament/event which had qualification for some other event as an extra prize. I'm missing the point about centuries/147s. Whether it was a separate event or simply qualifying for an event, doesn't matter - either way they are included in players centuries/147 totals. Nigej (talk) 14:55, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd argue that qualifying events should NOT be counted as "career finals" because they are just an avenue into the main event. The one I'm mostly concerned about is the Masters Qualifying Event, which is specified as a non-ranking event (article infobox), but isn't listed in the Calendar in our Season articles (e.g. 2019/20 calendar). There's definitely an inconsistency here and we need to decide one way or the other. Rodney Baggins (talk) 16:53, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Maybe the clue's in the name: "Masters Qualifying Event". It was presumably a separate event, not just "Masters Qualifying". I see that in 1953/1954 News of the World Snooker Tournament someone (maybe me) has written "The qualifying tournament was played ..." which is perhaps incorrect - was it a tournament or simply qualifying? Nigej (talk) 17:25, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , to be fair, they do appear on the calendar, such as 2009-10 snooker season (we haven't had a qualifier since), but there shouldn't really be anything, as it's just a qualification round with one qualifier. I don't really see how they gain additional rights as a event in their own right. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * For the 1953/1954 News of the World Snooker Tournament, The Billiard Player, which by that point was the official organ of the BACC, referred to the matches between Williams, Lees and Lees as "The 'B' Section" and mentions about the results that "Thus Rex Williams enters Section 'A'" - i.e. the matches which we have under "Results" in that article. A and B sections sounds to me more like it is one tournament. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Personally I think Masters Qualifying Event is a little bit different, because it's a continuation of the Benson and Hedges Championship which was a tournament in its own right, with the trophy, prize money for the winner etc. I think for one season it was even designated as a minor ranking event and was open to all pros so it wasn't just a qualification for the Masters. As for other qualifying events I used to treat them the same way as the B&H Champs/Masters Qualifying, I've even added Regal Scottish Masters Qualifying Event to the list of some player's career finals but I was probably wrong in this regard. So I think I would leave the Masters Qualifying as it is but I would probably remove all other qualifying events from the section (Scottish Masters, General Cup, World Seniors, News of the World etc). Therocket1990 (talk) 13:20, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

The Masters Qualifying Event is in fact a tournament in its own right and I have 8 sources to back it up. The point about centuries is very easily missed by some by it is quiet easy to understand. (1) Chris Turner's Snooker Archive lists all 147 breaks, if a break was made in a qualifying round of a tournament he listed the break with a (Q) after it to point out it was in a qualifying round. At the end of the page he then has a footnote (Q) Achieved in a qualifying round. This is not the case for Bingham's 147 in the tournament that is listed under the tournaments name "Masters Qualifying Tournament". So Chris Turner did not see it was a qualifier but as a proper Non-ranking tournament which he listed the tournament as and the winners under. (2) The WPBSA players profile pages for the WST lists all the winners of the Masters Qualifying event in its Non-ranking section. It even points out that Stuart Bingham is the only player to win the Masters Qualifying Event twice all players wins are included. (3) Snooker.org lists all these events as Non-ranking event wins. (4) Global Snooker Centre covers these events and again the Masters Qualifying Event is listed as a non-ranking tournament. (5) WST.TV reports on the wins of Trump and Mcleod as winning a non-ranking event. (6) Sky Sports also report on Trump winning his first professional title in this event. (7) Snooker Scene reports on Neil Robertson's first 10 professional titles including the Non-ranking Masters Qualifying Event and finally (8) inside Snooker cover Mcleods and Trumps wins again. This can all be easily found. Regards 80.233.84.2 (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps rather than including them in the Non-Ranking Finals table, they could be included in a separate Qualifying Event Finals table? If they are a qualifying event to a main tournament they they don't quite carry the same weight. 146.199.211.135 (talk) 11:33, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Which is exactly why we shouldn't be including them at all. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:05, 18 June 2021 (UTC)