View text source at Wikipedia

Talk:2024 Tour Championship

Good article2024 Tour Championship has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Featured topic star2024 Tour Championship is part of the Tour Championship (snooker) series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 30, 2024Good article nomineeListed
January 5, 2025Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Prize Money

[edit]

Can we put the prize money by round and highest break prize on this page, please, as we do for other tournaments? 82.129.119.62 (talk) 06:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The prize money has increased from last year's tournament but the exact amount hasn't been confirmed yet, we'll include that once it's announced! AmethystZhou (talk) 08:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Wilson 105

[edit]

@AmethystZhou: Neither WST nor SnookerInfo have recorded this break, which I am pretty sure is correct, and you have referred to it in the prose. Any idea why that might be?  Alan  (talk) 06:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WST's live score sites are messing up again! All three matches that finished on Apr 2 only had partial scores for the last frame, even though the page says "match complete": Carter/Hawkins, Williams/Ford, and Wilson/Selby. All three references I used from WST, Eurosport, and BBC mention the 105 clearance in the last frame, though. Hopefully the live score pages fix themselves, otherwise we'll need to remove those references, or add some notes to explain the discrepancy. AmethystZhou (talk) 07:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Assuming they sort it out, the references will need to be re-archived.  Alan  (talk) 07:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All scores are now correct apart from the Wilson/Selby match which still shows Wilson winning the 18th frame 52:30 with a 52 break. Having watched the ITV coverage on catch-up (https://www.itv.com/watch/snooker-tour-championship/2a6248/2a6248a0070), I can confirm that Wilson won the frame 105:30 with a 105 break.
I can also confirm that the WST scores for the final frames of the Carter/Hawkins and Williams/Ford matches are correct, after confirming on the ITV coverage. Steveflan (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for checking! AmethystZhou (talk) 08:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Further confirmation of Wilson's 105 break from the WST Twitter/X feed (https://twitter.com/wearewst/status/1775216205835456750?t=Eqgcg_mQkx0Db7_po1onMQ&s=19) Steveflan (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the note from the Carter/Hawkins match, since the archive agrees with the original. For the Williams/Ford match, I just tried to re-archive the page but it didn't work. I'll try again later.  Alan  (talk) 09:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Snookerinfo have now recorded the 105 century for Gary Wilson Steveflan (talk) 09:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to be unable to re-archive the Williams/Ford match. It keeps capturing the wrong version with the incorrect final frame score. I'll maybe leave it for now and have another go later.  Alan  (talk) 10:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done that now. Just the Wilson/Selby match to sort out.  Alan  (talk) 12:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and they have now screwed-up the Wilson/O'Sullivan match. No breaks at all.  Alan  (talk) 05:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BBC red button

[edit]

Results on BBC red button service say that Ford beat Williams 10-9. Is that an error? 90.242.168.216 (talk) 08:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. Williams won the deciding frame. Nigej (talk) 08:22, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case the BBC website also has the same error. Anyone know how we contact them to get it changed? 90.242.168.216 (talk) 10:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look at https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact  Alan  (talk) 11:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Use cuetracker.net to find Head to Head Stats

[edit]

CueTracker - Head-to-Head: Ronnie O'Sullivan Vs Ali Carter - Snooker Results & Statistics

Show 26 matches played, 23 wins for Ronnie and 3 for Carter. 86.154.20.1 (talk) 18:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cuetracker is a blacklisted non-RS. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The record is in regards to matches of 7 frames or longer. Carter's 2 extra wins in Cuetracker are in the Championship League (invitational event) which were best of 5 matches. O'Sullivans 4 extra wins in Cuetracker are 3 matches in the Championship League (invitational event) and another in the Premier League. For matches of 7 frames or longer Cuetracker matches the World Snooker Tour. I'm assuming the snooker.org 'error' was due to the Tour Championship match not being recorded on that page at the time - although it is there now and matches the 19-1 record for O'Sullivan in matches of 7 frames or longer. Steveflan (talk) 08:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 18-1 count from snooker.org does include the Tour Championship win. Sources like WST or Eurosport never clarifies exactly how they count the matches, but I assume it's best-of-7 or longer since the numbers (almost) match up. Still not sure where the discrepancy come from, so unfortunately we need to include a clarification every time their head-to-head comes up... AmethystZhou (talk) 08:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can only assume that snooker.org are then excluding the walkover that O'Sullivan got in the 2021 Welsh Open against Carter, whereas the other sites must be including it. Otherwise, everything else matches. Steveflan (talk) 09:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That must be it, but I think it's odd to count a walk-over as a win. AmethystZhou (talk) 09:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to me that the above discussion shows why we shouldn't be including this sort of information. The phrase "professional matches" is so vague as to be almost completely useless. Nigej (talk) 09:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Perhaps it would be better to take all of this out.  Alan  (talk) 09:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having looked into this quite a bit - it appears that WST (and WPBSA) only include matches that they show/record on their match centre. Unfortunately, despite several requests, neither can provide a full historical list of what matches are classed as 'professional', so we have no way of knowing which historical events should be included in figures like this. It's the same issue with counting centuries, in that we have no way of knowing which of the pre-1990(ish) tournaments are included in the figures and thus the media figures can't really be independently verified. Steveflan (talk) 09:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I totally agree, I just thinking using Cuetracker.net to fix that isn't the solution. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree also. I'll remove the reference to their head-to-head from the prose. AmethystZhou (talk) 10:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the subject of CueTracker, it seems to have gone to sleep, and hasn't been updated since 29 March. Most unusual.  Alan  (talk) 10:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's woken up. Must have been on holiday.  Alan  (talk) 14:03, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WST do it again

[edit]

Yet another problem with the WST scoring site. Not only have they finished the final frame of the O'Sullivan/Wilson semi-final early (102:0 to O'Sullivan), but this time they've even managed to lose the half-century/century breaks! (https://www.wst.tv/match-centre/9ce47381-8793-4668-9e3e-b6a0bc927540) - at the time of this post anyway.

Luckily snooker.org post the frame scores of the semi-finals, with the breaks included (https://www.snooker.org/res/index.asp?event=1459&template=22&season=2023) Steveflan (talk) 21:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that this is to do with the way in which the referee works the hand-held scoring device. This device links to the scroring system which, in-turn, is used to update the website. Some referees will switch the thing off when the match is over before properly updating it. In this case the referee was Paul Collier. It would be interesting to know who refereed the other matches that are screwed-up.  Alan  (talk) 06:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The official scoring site (for this season at least) is fast becoming a non-RS. There's only so much we can do to stop this happening. Whilst all RS have issues with this sort of thing, it is a constant barrage of wrong information. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately for these high-profile matches the articles usually mention the breaks, so technically we don't really need the WST live score references. AmethystZhou (talk) 16:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a very good point. Shall I delete them all then? They're a pain to maintain anyway.  Alan  (talk) 16:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and they've even got the last frame of the final wrong.  Alan  (talk) 06:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2024 Tour Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 21:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: BarntToust (talk · contribs) 23:37, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Lee Vilenski, do have to ask about something. In the notes, "For the 1st round match between Gary Wilson and Mark Selby, the source (WST) frame score data is incorrect. For the last (18th) frame WST has 52(52)‍–‍30. It was actually 105(105)‍–‍30." as well as "For the final match between Mark Williams and Ronnie O'Sullivan, the source (WST) frame score data is incorrect. For the last (15th) frame WST has 47‍–‍19. It was actually 50‍–‍19." - these are currently not verified by any source. If this is true, and if World Snooker Tour can't get their own match score right, that is very concerning? Should I be concerned? I'd appreciate some insight on this matter. BarntToust 23:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, the actual scoring mechanism of the governing body isn't always correct. Basically, how the scoring works is that the referees have a controller in their pockets and update the score with those.
Their own scoring is quite often a lot better than this, but we can only really note down where there is contradictions. In terms of frame scores, that doesn't actually change the overall score of a match, nor the content of Wikipedia. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fwiw, we don't usually link these at all normally, so I'm happy to remove. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:59, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski, if you can find a YouTube video or something like that from a perennial source of the final moments of a match and timestamp it where it shows the score, that's a-ok by me. If not, then I'd concur with removing it. BarntToust 15:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if you think you can find anything, you might check on ITV's channels and see if they've got clip uploads. BarntToust 16:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski, @AlH42, @Steveflan, I've some concerns about the WST's site and its reliability, so I'll bid to have them quelled. I'm tagging Al and Steve because they participated in an above discussion on Talk page of 2024 Tour Championship.
Besides the fact they can't get their scoring system correct, (which tempts me to put this on hold and to ask for a tertiary source if they may be found, or as above written a YouTube video) are there any concerns among any of you all about the reliability of the primary source on any other subjects concerning itself? BarntToust 01:16, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BarntToust: I don't know what you mean by "have them quelled" in this context. The WST and snooker.org are pretty‑much all we have. As far as I am aware, there is no tertiary source other than CueTracker, which is banned. Since the WST revamped their website last year, there have been a few instances of them getting scores wrong, but these are becoming less frequent as they are ironing out the wrinkles. For finals and semi‑finals, snooker.org records the frame scores.  Alan  (talk) 10:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...I just double‑checked, and snooker.org has the score correct for the last frame of the final, but the only place I could find with the score for the Wilson/Selby match is CueTracker.  Alan  (talk) 10:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added references to both footnotes. snooker.org for the final, and the BBC for the Wilson/Selby match which says that Wilson "sealed victory with a clearance of 105."  Alan  (talk) 11:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AlH42 Hey, good to hear. I'm just concerned that the definitive authority on this subject can't be correct on the key matter of getting a score right. I'm just generally wondering if the source should be questioned in its reliability for other matters relating to the championship. Like, if the source for the World Snooker Tour can't get basic facts right, should I be concerned about the WP:V of other things as well? BarntToust 16:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you need to be too concerned. As I said above, these little problems are becoming less frequent, and we can use snooker.org, and news sources such as the BBC and Eurosport to verify data where necessary, as I just did for the footnotes.  Alan  (talk) 17:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the ironing out process has gone well as you've said, I'll trust where third party sources denote correct info. Probably can check that one off, now. BarntToust 17:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good. Also bear in mind that from the start of the current season in June 2024 to the end of December 2024, there have been over 1,300 matches played. Only one had a problem of this type which had to be put in a footnote. This was one match in the Northern Ireland Open.  Alan  (talk) 19:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·