Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Snooker world rankings 1976/1977/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Snooker world rankings 1976/1977[edit]

1977 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only a little list, and not too much to say about it. Thanks in advance for any comments to help improve the list. There were informal ranking lists a few years earlier (from late 1973), including both professionals and amateurs, produced by a panel including Joe Davis and Ted Lowe for a bookmaker; I'll include a mention of those if reviewers think it's worthwhile. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 17:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by Vilenski[edit]

  • To be honest, I thought these articles are more suitable to not have a bold title. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not actioned - I know other Snooker world rankings featured lists don't have this but (barring it being against MOS) I'd prefer to keep it if it's not a required change. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:22, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • seeded first and the previous year's runner-up was seeded - no need for the second "was seeded". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • World Champion gained five points, the runner-up received four, losing semi-finalists got three, losing quarter-finalists got two, and losers in the last-16 - could probably be a bit more simple. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The eight-highest ranked players were placed direcly into the last-16 round of the 1977 World Snooker Championship - need to explain the alternative. If you weren't highly ranked, you'd have to play additional matches. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added. Indidentally, when the list was published, the idea was that the top 8 would be in normal seed positions in the draw, those ranked 9 to 14 would be drawn at random into last 16, and everyone else would play in the qualifiers. With many lower-ranked players unhappy about this, there was a WPBSA vote two weeks before the draw that came out 11-10 in favour of changing it. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:22, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from ChrisTheDude[edit]

  • There's no need for Main article: 1976–77 snooker season at the top given that it's linked in the first sentence
  • I've never seen an article where a "preceded by/succeeded by" template was placed centrally at the top, it looks odd to me. I would put it at the bottom as is by far the norm.
  • What makes "Chris Turner's Snooker Archive", which seems to be some random dude's personal website, a reliable source? If it is, there's no need to show the URL in the reference, just the site name would suffice
    • Pop-in note - Chris Turner, who wrote the website is the guy who used to do the statistics for both the BBC and Eurosport. I've used it in several FAs, it far surpasses WP:SPS, deemed a "snooker historian". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by MWright96[edit]

  • Lead: Clarify that the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association is professional snooker's governing body
  • Lead: "losing semi-finalists got three, losing quarter-finalists got two," - try and use different words to replace the ones that are highlighted in bold
  • Lead: "The same points system, using results from 1973, 1974 and 1975 had been used" - repetition of "used(ing)"
  • Rankings prose: with the total number of point" - typo; points
  • Rankings prose: "A "-" symbol" - the hyphen should ideally be an en dash per MOS:DASH as it is in the table
  • Higgins Infobox: Consider adding alt text to the Higgins image
  • There is some, unless I've misunderstood. Perhaps it could be improved? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:47, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Table: Think the title atop the table could do with expanding
  • Reference 4: The issue number for The Times reference is 59917
  • Reference 6: Mention that Lowestoft is in Suffolk in England for clarity

That's all I have for this list MWright96 (talk) 19:22, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, MWright96. Hopefully I've addressed everything you raised, but let me know if there are any points where more is needed. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:47, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AK[edit]

  • Disclaimer: I haven't checked references and will be claiming credit at the Wikicup.
  • I agree with Lee, the bold title does not look good here, incorporating it into natural prose would be better.
  • "results from 1973, 1974 and 1975 had" → "results from 1973, 1974 and 1975, had"
  • The alt text for the Higgins image doesn't need the comma.
  • That's it, not much to say here. AryKun (talk) 15:04, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, nothing else I could find. AryKun (talk) 02:45, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 20:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Snooker_world_rankings_1976/1977/archive1&oldid=1083830897"