Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American 14.1 Straight Pool Championship

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 speedy keep. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 13:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

American 14.1 Straight Pool Championship

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable tournament, with virtually zero coverage from independent reliable sources. De-prodded with the addition of a single reference from a questionable source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:46, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:50, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:50, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:50, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that this is a non-notable tournament. Although games like 9-ball and 10-ball have taken over in the last few decades, straight pool/14.1 is historically the most notable game of pool and the American 14.1 tournament together with the World_Tournament are the most prestigious title for this game. Look at the name of the winners for the past few years and lookup their accomplishment in other games of pocket billiards. Many players come from across the ocean to play in that tournament. Also, I would not say that AzBillard is a "questionable source", it has been around for 20 years and it is the main reference on the web for anything related to pocket billiard (except for snooker maybe which has a lot of media coverage). --Prob2prob (talk) 19:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)#[reply]
Keep AZ biliards is considered a reliable source for pool, and cue sports. See WP:CUE. To that end, I actually have a working relationship with AZBilliards signed off by WP:LIBRARY to use AZ Billiards as a source for all cue sports articles. Whilst AZBilliards does write their own information, it usually simply re-posts information from other sources. One look at: https://www.azbilliards.com/tours_and_events/304-american-141-straight-pool-championship/stories/ will show you that there has been quite a bit of press for the tournament, most notably in 2014, and 2017.

It should also be noted, it's run for 13 years. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is one of the major events in pool (as distinct from snooker and carom billiards). Despite its name, it's not just a national title, but an international competition. Our article doesn't go into it, but it's actually the continuation of a much older event going back to mid-century (itself an outgrowth of challenge matches going back even earlier). In general, when organizers of an event change, we tend to treat it as a different event. In this case we have little choice, since the original event, the U.S. Open Straight Pool Championship, has also re-started under the original name (since 2016). AZ Billiards is not a questionable source; it's the no. 1 news source in cue sports, with a professional editorial board and journalists. Billiards: The Official Rules and Records Book (Billiard Congress of America, 2017 seems to be the most recent edition) will also be a source for this. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 12:09, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WikiProject Cue Sports has been notified of this discussion. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 13:33, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above commentary by Lee Vilenski| and SMcCandlish. Verifiable evidence of notability exists. -The Gnome (talk) 12:04, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.