Talk:2021–22 snooker season

Season start date?

What's the source for the season starting in the autumn? Or has this just been copied from the previous season's article? --CitroenLover (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

No source given [or whoever added it doesn't read talkpages]. So in that view, until we get an actual start time, I've corrected the lead to represent what is known: all we can gather is the season would start minimally June 2021 after Q School and no earlier. --CitroenLover (talk) 15:32, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

UK Seniors Event

The 2021 UK Seniors Championship is taking place in August, which could be added to this season's calendar. Source: https://www.bonusarenahull.com/whats-on/uk-seniors-snooker-2021/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:BB6:1AE4:D658:F8FC:6A21:6B6B:7A0B (talk • contribs)

Could probably add the three Seniors events announced for next year, as per the snooker.org season page as well. [1] Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Calendar

I've currently populated the calendar with a list of apparent tournaments that may be run in this season, based on a post shared on social media by a current professional player. I deliberately included nameless-qualifiers since we don't know what tournament they will be for, but can be removed later. Country flags were guestimated based on the tournament, but some are only given as "tbc", these will need to be changed when officialised. --CitroenLover (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Venue locations

I believe that this article should be considered an official source of venue locations. Especially because WST retweeted the article themselves, effectively officialising whats been written. Unfortunately we don't know WGP, PC or TC locations but we know that 3 locations have been given for them, but not the per-tournament locations.

TBH I don't know if people read this talkpage, but leaving it here in case it starts a valid discussion. --CitroenLover (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Pro-am events?

Before covid, we included pro-am events in the season calendar. The Ding Junhui Snooker Academy will be holding a pro-am in July.

This has been pushed back to 8th August.

We only included them if they were included on the WST/WPBSA calendars. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:26, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

References

What's the point in listing the women's events, if they're going to be red-linked?

The 2021 UK Women's Championship is currently taking place this weekend. It's down to the QFs, which features current professional tour player, Reanne Evans. The event page has not been created for this event, which would not happen with a "professional tour" event. So, my question is, what is the point in listing these women's events, if they're just going to be red-linked?— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Because they are notable events. See WP:REDLINK. Feel free to create the articles for these yourself, if you can cobble enough citations to show notability per WP:GNG. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:14, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

You state they are notable, but then make a flippant comment about cobbling enough citations to show their notability...which is it? If they are notable, then someone should create them, like someone creates the "professional tour" events. I've never felt the need to create those, because someone else always does it before myself. I disagree on the notability of these female events, and obviously others do too, hence the event page not being created while the event is taking place! Would not happen with a professional tour event, and you know it.

Please sign your posts with ~~~~. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:56, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

We are volunteers. We have redlinks to items that are notable, and that no article yet exists, usually done so to promote the article being made. An article not being written during the event is not really relevant to whether or not it is suitable for Wikipedia. Some events are more popular than others, which is why they might get an article before another one. Please re-read our policy on redlinks.

When you do create an article, you will need to include enough citations to prove it meets the guidelines. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Will we be able to "cobble" enough citations together, though, LEE? ~West Bishes

Dooks, you have been told more than a few times to log in to your account to edit. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:49, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Ugh, this is the second time I, personally, have been accused of this "Dooks" user by you, LEE, as if it's your big comeback retaliation. Regardless, firstly, I am not them, compare IP addresses or whatever, secondly, this is isn't really the place for this discussion, is it LEE? Before telling people what to do as an editor, one should know how to properly conduct oneself. ~West Bishes

Do you indend to help build an encyclopedia, or simply mock users? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:06, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

The whole point of THIS talk section was ABOUT building an encyclopedia, for the season's events. I don't agree that the women's events are notable, but if we are going to list them, I was questioning leaving them red-linked. That was all. You started this ugly direction of discussion with your "cobble enough citations" remark, and then accusing me of being another user. ~West Bishes

- please sign your posts with ~~~~. I don't really see how they aren't notable events? It had coverage in articles by the BBC, WST, Eurosport the metro (whilst not an RS, it's promising it was covered to this extent) and we even have an article on the [[:it:UK Women's Championship 2021|Italian Wikipedia]. It would also likely have quite a bit of coverage in Snooker Scene when that comes out in around a month. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:52, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

So, eventually, it shouldn't be red-linked then? Great, that's all I was asking. - please sign your posts with, WEST BISHES

Finalists in ranking tournaments

Seems to me that this table ought to go (and the previous years too). It's basically a repeat of what's in the calendar but put in the form of a league table (with "rank"), giving the impression that there is some sort of competition going on here, which is not the case. We have List of snooker players by number of ranking titles which covers career wins. Something in eg 2021 Champion of Champions makes a lot of sense since wins determine qualification, but here there seems to be no clear reason for the table's existence. Personally I've never seen such a table outside Wikipedia. Not encyclopedic content, just a dull table. Nigej (talk) 16:00, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd agree to a point. I've always found these tables to be a shortcut used to avoid putting in prose. I'd agree that they could be culled, as they are only really notable on a few occasions (such as someone winning 5-6 events, or someone making lots of finals). This sort of info is easy just to comment on in the summary section. I'd be happy to remove it from 2019-20 snooker season, which is the only GA in this series. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:10, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

I disagree. The two users above having this chat does NOT make a consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:F504:69D9:608C:9A4A (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

It wasn't a chat. I opened a discussion, which anyone in the world could take part in, IP users included. Only one other person bothered to respond. After a week I deleted the section, based on the views of the two people who participated in the discussion. Nigej (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

How are IP users made aware of this discussion, and if they didn't respond within a week, the change would be made with no further debate? One comment each from two users, wait of one week = consensus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:F504:69D9:608C:9A4A (talk) 19:31, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, not having an account (or choosing not to use one) means you cannot be pinged, although you have the same ability to read talk pages as the rest of us. Do you have a policy related argument for keeping these unsourcable tables? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:37, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Why were they created in the first place? What were the arguments FOR creating them? Why are SOME users against those reasons now? It seems like every week you (Lee) and one or two others are making arguments to get rid of something on the snooker seasons pages. "Finalists table"/"High break prize"/"Non-WST events", and I believe Nigej is also arguing to get rid of listing the Seniors events. I use these season pages quite frequently, and it's very frustrating not knowing which item or detail you few users are "debating" to get rid of each week.

I've got no idea why it was first included and it seems neither have you. However that's completely irrelevant anyway. Content can be challenged and it's up to those who want to keep to it, to justify its inclusion. That's how Wikipedia works. If you want to keep it you'll need to come up with arguments for keeping it. Seems that the pseudo league table was first created at 2016–17 snooker season by an IP user 81.107.207.12 on 29 August 2017, see here: 797696712. It was called "Stats" (which indeed it is). There was no edit summary and the content was not referenced. The "Champions by country" sections were removed some time ago. Worth reading WP:NOSTATS. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." etc etc Nigej (talk) 05:44, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

unreferenced material is liable for removal at any time. You haven't given any policy reason for any of the changes you wish to make. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:26, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

How about, I'm debating the issue as I want to slow you fellows down on moving onto the next pointless change you will want to make? Nah, probably not a good enough enough reason. But hey, one change you can make to the season is this, are any of you geniuses aware that two of the four currently listed Seniors events (those would be the ones in red) aren't even scheduled to take place this season? I'll let you masters do the research to find out which two have been cancelled and which two will be taking place. Also, go ahead and change it on the Seniors event page, too. Vest Kishes, IPfreeLEE Userenski. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:C106:1662:F5DF:44EB (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

If you're not prepared to have you edits changed or removed, then Wikipedia's not the place for you. Run your own site where you're in full control. Nigej (talk) 05:28, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Ironic, since it's YOUR edits I and other IP users have a problem with. Maybe Wikipedia's not the place for you. If I suddenly wanted something changed, I would be open to others disagreeing or debating with my changes. It is YOU who seems not prepared to have THEIR edits changed or removed.

A mystifying comment, if I may say so. Apparently I should "be open to others disagreeing or debating with my changes". But isn't that exactly what I've done here by opening a debate ("Seems to me that this table ought to go ..."), quite prepared for others to disagree and for the table to stay. I could have simply deleted the tables (which seems to be your style if you don't like something), but I didn't, I opened up a debate here. Currently, nearly two weeks later, we've still not have a single reason for keeping the table other than someone making the point that the original creator must surely have had a good reason to do so. Nigej (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't delete anything...I restore things you delete. So, the opposite of what you're implying I do. The tables are a great way to see the main people who've done the best in ranking events of the season, how many tournaments wins (like Judd) or a notable run to finals, but losing them all like Ronnie last year. I'm sure that's not a good enough reason, so like I said earlier, why don't you just move onto the next item on these season pages you've tired of seeing and want to delete?

My issue there is that the second paragraph of the lede of 2020–21 snooker season says much the same in a more interesting and succinct way (and could be expanded to include other interesting details) and, together with the calendar, contains everything the reader might want to know about who appeared in ranking finals, without pretending that O'Sullivan was 9th in some sort of pseudo league table, and Lisowski 10th. Nigej (talk) 18:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Cancelled Seniors Events?

Are you guys aware that two of the currently listed Seniors events on this article have been cancelled? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:81E2:8ACC:171C:BB07 (talk) 23:55, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

We are, because you told us before. The fact that no one's done anything about it here, is a sure sign that these events are of little or no interest to people and that putting them in the same table as the important events is a mistake. They need putting in a separate section at the bottom of the article. Nigej (talk) 06:18, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I wanted to bring it up again after the Q Tour events were added yesterday...also, do the seniors events have more or less interest than the red-linked women's events? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:81E2:8ACC:171C:BB07 (talk) 08:31, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I would say that from an encyclopedic point-of-view they're about the same, so in my view the women's events also ought to be removed from the main table and have its own section at the end of the article. Nigej (talk) 08:40, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

"The 2021–22 snooker season is an ongoing professional snooker season", why cover non-professional events at all if that's the opening sentence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:81E2:8ACC:171C:BB07 (talk) 08:45, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

However the article is called 2021–22 snooker season not 2021–22 professional snooker season, so it's perhaps the opening sentence that needs changing. Anyway the word "professional" is ambiguous and, in my view, would cover any event that offered significant prize money to the winner. Nigej (talk) 08:54, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

That's not strictly true, as "professional status" has a specific meaning, in that it's for players in the professional tour. I agree it should be individual tables for these different events (similar to say 2020 in cue sports), because these events are part of the snooker season, but aren't part of the snooker tour. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:31, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

The problem I have is that we're meant to be an encyclopedia useable by the general public and, as such, when we use a word like "professional" we should be using it the sense they know and not in some snooker-jargon way that defies the English language. Nigej (talk) 12:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

That's not exactly true either - the term professional specifically refers to people, in that someone is a professional because they use the activity as a main paid occupation, rather than as a pasttime. An event hosting large prize money isn't a reason for it to be a professional event. The winner of the FA Cup gets almost £2 million in prize money, but it's specifically not a professional event. A professional event is an event with the intention of only containing only professional players. Whilst I know we currently have a few amateurs making up the numbers, it's hard to disagree that the main tour events carry this moniker. It's also true that sources describe them as such (it does get murky the further you go back, and arguably there are zero truely professional pool/billiard events). There's a small argument that the seniors and women's tours are actually pro/am events now, but realistically they are amateur events with a few professional players. However, it's a little moot, as the lede should totally not comment that this is about professional events - it's about events that make up the snooker season, which clearly includes world seniors and the women's events. There's also a good argument for the major amateur events being a part of this (world, UK, European etc), and maybe even the World Games. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:56, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

As you say it's something of a moot point, but I'm still of the view that if we want to talk about main tour events/players as opposed to other events/players we should say so in clear terms and not use proxy-words like professional and amateur for these; many readers won't get the subtle distinction. Nigej (talk) 14:52, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

- I feel like we have crossed wires. On an article such as this, events should be split by the names of the tours, not by amateur/professional. I was speaking a bit more generally (such as in the articles for the events themselves). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:52, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm bringing this up again, as these two seniors events were removed, but were then re-added, for some reason. The Seniors Irish Masters in March (this month!) and the Seniors Masters in May, I can't find any RECENT confirmation they're still happening this "2021-22 snooker season".

Don't pollute the overview with women, seniors and q tour please

Literally nobody cares about those events. Instead leave it at a nice overview of the events that matter. Remove the others or at least put them in a separate section please. 2001:9E8:309D:300:3446:DFE7:8337:8D3D (talk) 23:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Who are you to say what "matters". I have previously attempted to change list to be in separate lists (similar to say, 2020 in cue sports, where "it needs to be in a calendar" was the argument. We don't just cater to the world snooker tour.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Before we get into a war of mainly POW driven arguments here, maybe notability criteria should be applied. The world snooker tour is certainly not by default the only thing that matters for a snooker season. What's considered relevant by said criteria, belongs here. If in a sub-article or anywhere else, might be discussed. -- Kohraa Mondel (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

2022 Seniors World Championship

This page could be created? They've announced the 24 players (including Michael Holt), and the draw took place earlier this week on the BBC.

http://www.snooker.org/res/index.asp?event=1165 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8085:7160:3B80:A12B:E88C:AB15:E99 (talk) 07:39, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

References

"Other non-tour affiliated events"

What are "Other non-tour affiliated events"? Is it a valid categorisation? Why should we include them here (or in other season articles)? Nigej (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't feel this detracts too much for two reasons:

1. It's source from the official WPBSA website

2. It relates to a regular tournament that was, originally, a minor ranking event (part of the Asian PTC)

For earlier seasons, I would say if the tournament is not included in the list of snooker tournaments then it shouldn't be there, but freely admit that this might be a very simplistic view. Steveflan (talk) 14:34, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Poor wording - these are either amateur, professional or Pro-Am. We don't care if it's affiliated with the tour or not. "World Snooker Tour" should really just be "professional". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Ideally we should have some clear inclusion criteria for "other events". I can't find anything about the 2021/22 Haining Open on the WPBSA website and including it because it was a minor-ranking event 7 years ago seems a very poor reason for adding it. And including it because we included it last time it was played is also a poor reason. This particular event has fallen on hard times and is basically a domestic event, like countless others round the world. Nigej (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I repeat myself. But this article is about the snooker season in general. So any snooker event should be included, where the general notability criteria apply. All of them, and all others not. That's why we have these criteria at wp, so I'd find it reasonable, if we base all further dicussion on it. -- Kohraa Mondel (talk) 16:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

My point was initially something quite different. What is a "non-tour affiliated event"? Now that it's been changed to "Other events" I have no particular issue. Nigej (talk) 17:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I'm not sure where you are repeating yourself from (excuse me if it's another page). Notable events wouldn't include the Gaining Open (which for whatever reason was re-added here), but would potentially include items such as IBSF World Snooker Championship and the World Games. There's a few ways to treat this in my eyes:

• Keep the page as is, but have strict inclusion criteria (only professional events, only events we have articles on, etc)
• Have the article change to the 2021-22 World Snooker Tour, and merge the rest into the corresponding into 2021 in cue sports.
• As an addition to the above, we could then potentially have articles for other tours, provided they get enough coverage.
• List all national and international events in this article. I do think this discussion should probably be concluded at WT:SNOOKER, as we might want to get a wider consensus as to what is suitable and do wholesale changes. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:13, 12 June 2022 (UTC)