Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snooker commentary (2nd nomination)

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 delete. Without prejudice to a rewrite from scratch as a sourced article, or a restoration for the purpose of merging some names into another list, as has been suggested. Sandstein 06:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Snooker commentary[edit]

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

The page was previously nominated for deletion in 2006 on grounds that it was original research and unnecessary. Nearly six years later, the article is still completely unsourced (violates WP:SOURCE) and, indeed, the original author has said that it is essentially impossible to source. It does not establish that its subject is notable, beyond its own assertion that snooker commentary is significantly different from other sports commentary and therefore needs its own article (violates WP:NOTABILITY). The article fails to cover snooker commentary in general but is mostly a list of the BBC's current (when?) commentators and unverifiable statements about what they are "perhaps most famous for" (violates WP:NOTEVERYTHING, WP:WEASEL, WP:ALLEGED). Simply removing the unverifiable material would leave the article essentially empty. Dricherby (talk) 22:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the third and fourth sentences of the nom. When the article was previously nominated for AfD in 2006, much of it consisted of lists of anecdotes and catchphrases from the BBC's snooker broadcasts, which were unsourced. Now that content is gone, leaving the article less colorful but no better sourced. While it is presumably possible to source who were the BBC commentators and when, that would make this article mostly just a list of BBC snooker commentators rather than a discussion of the overall topic of commentary on snooker. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:00, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unsourced, full of OR, impossible to source the exact topic. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but not as the article currently is - extract the list to List of snooker commentators. Most of the content here is a list of snooker commentators, which would be a valid list and should be easy to source. The rest can go. --Michig (talk) 07:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep US editors may not be aware that snooker has been a massive TV sport in the UK ever since the introduction of colour TV. The commentary has particular technical features which have received comment in a variety of sources - the hushed tones, the tactical insight, &c. - and so it's reasonble that we cover this in some way. Warden (talk) 18:10, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- When the article was previously nominated, it appears that it was kept essentially in the hope that somebody would write a proper article explaining these things, citing reputable sources and so on. In the six years that have passed since then, this has manifestly not happened. How long do we keep hoping? Dricherby (talk) 18:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and basically agree with Michig. (We seem not to have a separate article on this Rob Walker, even though his high television visibility at this time of year means many readers - like me - will be looking for something about him; I'm going to link to this article from the Rob Walker disambiguation page.) Victor Yus (talk) 05:41, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have just found List of sports announcers which has a snooker section. Some names from there ought to feature here too. Of course one option would be to merge this page into the other list, but I still think it preferable to keep this as a separate article (after some clean-up), as it can include more detail which there would not necessarily be room for on the all-sports list. Victor Yus (talk) 06:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Much of the article is a list of notable presenters/commentators, and notable as a list. Televised snooker is notable by the notability rules for TV programs. As for sourcing, many newspapers' sports sections publish reviews of TV sports coverage, which would be a source. I added a couple of refs. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:54, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Anyone wanting to write a proper article on this subject should look at the available academic sources, such as doi:10.1016/0378-2166(94)90079-5, doi:10.1023/B:IJST.0000037071.39044.cc, doi:10.1177/0961463X95004003005, doi:10.1177/016344396018001005, ISBN 9780761959106 pp. 62–68, ISBN 9780415131247 p. 31 etc. I'm rather surprised that none of these sources mention what seems to me to be the most obvious feature of snooker commentary: the complete absence of correctly used adverbs or past participles. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as it stands, this is just a laundry list of snooker commentators, which is already covered at List of sports announcers#Snooker without all the attendant unsourced OR guff. If someone wants to write a genuine article on the supposedly unique/distinctive aspects of snooker commentary, which are not currently alluded to at all in the article, they may as well start that from scratch -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, both lists contain names and information that the other doesn't. The two should certainly be merged, so the question to discuss is perhaps rather whether the merged list should be part of List of sports announcers or a separate page. As I said before, my take is that there's enough material here (even when the opinion is removed) to justify a separate page. Victor Yus (talk) 10:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →B music ian 02:07, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, just an indiscriminate list of snooker commentators without asserting why those particular commentators are notable. JIP | Talk 05:43, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to be more true of List of sports announcers (the snooker section and every other section). And thousands of other Wikipedia lists, for that matter. The article we're discussing here is a bit superior to that, as it does give some references and additional information about the commentators (obviously the main BBC commentators on a significant sport like this are going to be notable, and so on). Victor Yus (talk) 07:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very poor article with very few citations. Perhaps there is the beginnings of a suitable encyclopaedia article in there somewhere, but currently it reads like a loose collection of personal observations on a random selection of TV snooker commentators. Content is chiefly POVs and OR that would never be permitted on their personal articles. So why have them here? This article has had long enough to shape up, it's not happening. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 23:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FYI I've just started a stub article on Rob Walker (sports announcer), using some of the information and cites from this page. Victor Yus (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I failed to find notability for Rob Walker. This is a separate issue to the AfD so we should discuss it at Talk:Rob_Walker_(sports_announcer), rather than here. Dricherby (talk) 10:42, 13 May 2012 (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.