DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Snooker

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác
Shortcut
icon
Archives (Index)

The Four Jolly Snookers

[edit]

There is an interesting article here that is "a critical re-examination of the origins of snooker". The linked full PDF version includes sources. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:41, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And will look forward to reading this one too. :-) HurricaneHiggins (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a read. I suspect like most things, the exact origins of this will have been misconstrued. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:47, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Everything I wrote in the article is backed up with references to the source. Archivist62 (talk) 09:10, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hendon, in his new book, quotes Ainsworth's research about the weather. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Ainsworth didn't do any research into the weather or climate. Hendon's book is a work of fiction, written by AI. It's just not a reliable source of info. Archivist62 (talk) 18:24, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:DooksFoley147 has reappeared as User:Sisao25

[edit]

Banned user User:DooksFoley147 has reappeared as User:Sisao25 (previously also User:Kentbobo and plenty of IP addresses geolocating to Ireland). Clearly the same person with interests in Snooker, Golf, Darts, Football (particularly Arsenal FC), the band Oasis. Also shows the same style of editing, adding trivial events and then aggressively complaining when they get removed. Nigej (talk) 16:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nigej, can you please make a report about this at WP:SPI so we can handle it? Thanks. -- asilvering (talk) 18:47, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can do. Nigej (talk) 18:49, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Someone that very much appears to be this user is now editing Alex Higgins. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:55, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If this is the case, can one of ye file a case at SPI with the evidence? I have no idea who this user is but since this disruption has continued for a month after this was filed (including at darts articles, where I keep seeing this editor in edit wars) and the editor is still not blocked (nor any sockpuppet case filed) I said I'd ask. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 22:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nigej, pinging you re the above since I see the editor is still doing it as of yesterday, and a block would be a better solution than having to continually run around reverting the user. — ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 18:02, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Today's featured article draft schedule for November

[edit]

Hi all, 2019 Champion of Champions and Terry Griffiths are both listed at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2025. Please feel free to improve them before they hit the main page! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:53, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd forgotten about that CoC article. Might need a touch up. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:33, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BennyOnTheLoose @Lee Vilenski I made some minor edits the other day but I'm sure it could use more sets of eyes! HurricaneHiggins (talk) 14:31, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the century breaks section of the C of C article, maybe total reads better than series? A series of 20 century breaks were made during the competition. I was going to change it but I'm not keen on altering an article that's been through a featured review. Canary757 (talk) 14:37, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you @Canary757, total sounds better than series to me too. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 18:54, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The “Channel 5” thing

[edit]

It appears Channel 5 are not going to become the broadcaster of anything in snooker under the previous announcement, because a new announcement has been made that ITV signed a one-year extension to continue being broadcaster for all the ITV Snooker events: https://championofchampionssnooker.co.uk/itv-and-matchroom-sign-extension-for-snooker-and-darts-events/

we will need to update 2025 British Open and the 2025 Champion of Champions articles to account for this debacle. — CitroenLover (talk) 12:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not long after i posted this talkpage message, the article has been taken down. Unclear if thats because the information is incorrect or if its been posted too early. CitroenLover (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There was article last year: https://www.wst.tv/news/2024/september/24/itv-and-matchroom-sign-extension-for-snooker-and-darts-events/ with exactly the same title. Nigej (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Nigej Interestingly enough, someone pointed this out to me elsewhere. I don't really know what to think.... I can't imagine that someone from Matchroom just decided to troll everyone by finding that old announcement, copy/pasting it and badging it as a new story for publishing today.... -- CitroenLover (talk) 19:24, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I might suggest that individual tournament articles should say only which broadcasters covered that specific event. We already have a dedicated Timeline of snooker on UK television article that can be used to track the kinds of changes being made here. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 00:36, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IABot?

[edit]

Hi all, I'm trying to use IABot to archive references, but when I click on "Fix a Single Page" under "Run Bot," I get this error:

Permission error

The action you are trying to perform requires the analyzepage permission.

This permission is obtainable with the following groups: basicuser, user, admin, root, bot

I've used IABot before and this has never happened to me previously. Anyone else experiencing this or know how to fix it or secure the required permissions? Thanks so much. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 12:46, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry HH, I've been away. Are you still having this issue? Sometimes IABot tries to log me out when I run it, which could cause this Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:31, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, @Lee Vilenski, I just saw your message. Yes, unfortunately, I am still having this issue. I've tried logging out and back in again, but it still persists. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 12:18, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All I can suggest is opening up a phab ticket for this. It really isn't ideal. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:09, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 November 2025

[edit]
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. Closing as moved, however, closing as no consensus for the 2020 pages specifically. A new RM for those pages can be opened straight away if anyone so wishes. CoconutOctopus talk 17:50, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The pageviews of Category:World Grand Prix (snooker) pages from 2015–2025
The pageviews of Category:World Grand Prix (darts) pages from 2015–2025

– There is no clear Primary Topic for World Grand Prix, so should be disambiguated. DartsF4 (talk) 19:27, 20 November 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 16:25, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nomination. The darts comes up first on Google too. Katzrockso (talk) 02:47, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, except the 2020 events for which no rationale is given.. Bit odd that 2014 World Grand Prix, 2022 World Grand Prix, etc. are red links. Shouldn't they either be dab pages or redirects to the darts event. Nigej (talk) 08:19, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My concern with the 2020 ones is that the current titles could be mistaken for the 2020 World Grand Prix (darts) as the PDC World Championships are officially 2019/20 and 2020/21 for those years.
You could change them to 2019–20 snooker season and 2020–21 snooker season if you think that’s better suited DartsF4 (talk) 03:31, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble is that there are other snooker articles like 2020 European Masters (2019–20 season). Changing some but not others might lead to more confusion not less. Nigej (talk) 06:51, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2020 Coral World Grand Prix and 2020 Matchroom World Grand Prix because those sound more natural even though commercial. Support moving the others to the proposed titles in order to not favour one sport over another. Joe vom Titan (talk) 16:00, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To me those two are the worst option so far. No one will know which is which. See WP:COMMONNAME. Nigej (talk) 17:06, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, we do NOT promote sponsorship in this way. The only time we do add sponsors to titles is when we have no other option. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:28, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too fussed on the pageview information, that's always been a poor argument... but I do agree that these events are not materially larger than the darts events and this should be disambiguated. See WP:TWODAB/WP:NOPRIMARY. Not sure if there is other events with "World Grand Prix", but more than likely there is. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:30, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: A consensus is needed for both 2020 seasons – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 16:25, 3 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion about WikiProject banner templates

[edit]

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say "priority" instead of "importance". This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower Huddle • Handiwerk 19:49, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)[reply]

2026-27 snooker season article

[edit]

Even though we’re a long way feom the start of the 2026-27 snooker season, I’d like to suggest that a stub article be created for the next season because we already have dates for several tournaments and the expectation of the China Open returning next season as well. —CitroenLover (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @CitroenLover. I'd fully support this idea. In reality, we are less than 7 months away from the start of the next season, which I don't regard as too early. I created stub articles for the 2025–26 tournaments before the season started, and so far I believe that's working out fairly well, as it allows information to be added as it becomes available — as opposed to a situation the previous season where some articles were being created at the very last minute. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneHiggins i agree, a stub page is better than no page, and people can update it when new information comes to light. We know some information is likely to stay the same but we can update if things change. If you want to prep a stub page for the season with the info we know, go for it —CitroenLover (talk) 12:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Will do, @CitroenLover ... I'll take a look at this over the next few days. :) HurricaneHiggins (talk) 13:27, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, the requirement is simply that we have enough sourcing that says events are happening and when. If we have a rough calendar, that's probably plenty for a stub to exist Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:06, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Lee Vilenski. Looking at WST calendar for the 2026-27 season, it has five events already confirmed (2026 British Open, 2026 English Open, 2026 Northern Ireland Open, 2026 UK Championship, and 2027 Masters), which is a start.
That said, I've had a look at the season page, and it's a bit beyond my Wikipedia editing knowledge with all the tables and other formatting. That kind of page creation is not my strength. Anyone with those kind of skills willing to take this on? Even if it's a stub that could be expanded later? HurricaneHiggins (talk) 13:08, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneHiggins Unfortunately I have no time spare to be able to work on this now, but you could always create a draft page in your user space -- eg User:HurricaneHiggins/Draft2026Season -- and play around with the syntax needed to create the actual article without it going into a public page? --CitroenLover (talk) 19:08, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @CitroenLover, totally understood. I'm pretty tapped out too at the moment ... I've been writing all of the tournament summary sections virtually single-handedly since the World Championship. That's why I'd be grateful to see an editor better versed in table formatting step up and create a page for the next season. This kind of stuff is really not my forte. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 14:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thats no problem @HurricaneHiggins. I’ll look at this tomorrow — even if it just creating the table output for you — as now the Shoot-Out is confirmed, and even without dates or official confirmation just now, we can pretty much guess when the Scottish Open is going to happen [but i won’t include it on the table in a visible way]. — CitroenLover (talk) 23:33, 13 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@HurricaneHiggins I've set up the table for WST-only events here: User:CitroenLover/SeasonTable. World Championship is included, despite not being on any sources yet, solely because there's many years of precedent. Some events are mentioned like Wuhan, Xi'an and a couple others, which aren't on the WST tournaments page, but they are mentioned by Matchroom on their "Qualifying Schedule" news article: however, that article doesn't give dates or venues, hence they're just there because we know already they're going to be played. --CitroenLover (talk) 14:17, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @CitroenLover, this is fantastic. Love what you've done here, and there's definitely enough here for a stub article. Great work! I'll migrate this to a stub article shortly. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 18:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay @CitroenLover, we are live :-) HurricaneHiggins (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Great news! Glad to have helped. 👍 -- CitroenLover (talk) 20:11, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{32TeamBracket}} vs #invoke:RoundN

[edit]

Which one is preferred? I'm noticing some articles use the former, and a lot of articles use the latter. One negative to the RoundN LUA module is that it does not support dark mode when accessed on a mobile device, instead the template is light mode, which can be very jarring: this does not impact the 32TeamBracket template which themes itself to dark mode if the user views the wiki with that enabled. However, RoundN does have the benefit of being flexible for any type of tournament without requiring specific templates for specific brackets. Is there any preference to which one we should be using (World Championship excluded, which uses its own template for dates reasons), or does it not really matter in the grand scheme of things? -- CitroenLover (talk) 12:24, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at {{32TeamBracket}} you'll see that's it's a wrapper for Module:Team bracket. In 2025 Scottish Open (snooker) we're actually using {{32TeamBracket-Info}} which uses Module:Build bracket. So the comparison here is really between Module:Team bracket, Module:Build bracket and Module:RoundN. I've not looked into it but I don't remember us using Module:Build bracket in the past. Generally Module:Team bracket uses the long-winded RD1-team01= style while Module:RoundN uses a much more compact style but it's not that easy to work out where the text needs to go. Perhaps doesn't matter too much but it's a bit confusing that (for instance) sometimes its "boldwinner=high" and sometimes its "bold winner=high" depending on which module you're using. Nigej (talk) 13:35, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah good spot there. Yeah I don't think it matters too much, but its creating a relatively inconsistent viewing experience [desktop vs mobile], where it would be better if all the pages used a consistent template implementation. Ultimately, in the long run, its about ease of editing. --CitroenLover (talk) 14:27, 20 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Senior events in finals

[edit]

I saw this edit [1] for British Seniors open final being added as a non-ranking final.

I don't see this as a non-ranking event as it's not professional. I've been thinking for a while we should be more descriptive and specific as to what events we include and where they should live. If like your thoughs. Here's my thoughts on what we should have:

  • Ranking finals
Specifically events that are labelled as ranking events by the World Snooker Tour specifically - no change
  • Minor Ranking finals
Same as #1. No change.
  • Professional non-ranking finals
Could also be named "Tour non-ranking events" or otherwise. This would only contain events on the Tour, or otherwise listed as strictly professional events. Amateur wildcards notwithstanding.
  • Other major finals
This would be to sort of merge everything else. Pro-am events shouldn't be distinct from team events, or under 18 events. We'd have to be strict on this, but I think we could include events on the seniors tour here, national titles (such as the English Amateur title), international titles (such as the World Games, etc), variant events (such as Snooker+ and six-red world championships) and junior events. I think potentially a good judge as to whether an event is justified is if there is an article on the event as a whole.

The only other thing to be added is potentially on the women's bios events on the Ladies tour. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:53, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've never been comfortable with seniors events being lumped in the non-ranking section for the same reason. I agree with separating them.
I'm not so sure about putting pro-am/variant/amateur etc into one section as it could potentially end up enormous. Using Darren Morgan#Career finals as an example, the "other" table could end up with over 50 rows as almost all of his non-ranking finals would end up in one section. Also a difficulty with the team event layout being different.
Or would you envisage a layout similar to Neil Robertson#Amateur titles? I think putting everything into a prose section like that rather than a table would work better for a large "other" section. Or if retaining the career finals section tables as they are now, maybe splitting off Seniors into a table of its own would work? I had proposed this here before but never ended up implementing it (the reason for which escapes me). Andygray110 (talk) 20:18, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
you are right, we could have it as it's own section. I'm keen not to split things too heavily when they are just non-professional events. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:38, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red year-long focus on women in sport

[edit]

Throughout the whole of 2026, Women in Red is focusing on women in sport. This provides opportunities for creating biographies of notable women in a wide variety of sports, including snooker. If you are not already a member of Women in Red, feel free to join up under "New registrations" here.--Ipigott (talk) 10:12, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anon editor changes

[edit]

An anonymous editor, or possibly several anonyous editors, is/are making a number of changes to articles inlcuding adding qualifying events to lists of tournaments wins. (Sounds familiar...). See e.g. Paddy Morgan, Kingsley Kennerley, John Spencer (snooker player). A few of the edits, IMO, are OK so I haven't reverted those. If you have snooker articles on your watchlist please keep an eye out! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also for the Scottish Masters from 1997 to 2002, the qualifying events are listed in the players' articles as tournament wins (not sure how long they've been there). Think it's a stretch to class those as a title. Andygray110 (talk) 18:53, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The victories in the Scottish Masters that are listed are on the Snooker.org website, They added them as a separate event and title, just like the Masters qualifying tournament counts as a title.

That isn't the consensus we have. We don't include qualification events. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:31, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]