Talk:2023 World Snooker Championship

Women taking part

I've added a "failed verification" tag to "Five female players took part in qualification, the most in the event's history". The source, a tweet, says "For the first time in 31 years, FIVE women will compete in qualifiers for the Crucible", not that it is a record. (The statement may be true, but there were also five women in the qualifying competition in 1992: Allison Fisher, Stacey Hillyard, Ann-Marie Farren, Karen Corr, and Maureen McCarthy.)

Also, I think that "This was the first female century break made at the event since 2002" could do with rephrasing. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:52, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. I've changed the wording to say what the source says (and changed it from a tweet to an actual article about it). The women's stuff is a bit awkward to word. I started with "first century break made by a woman" but it felt wordy to me. It definitely needs a copyedit. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

How about: Mink Nutcharut completed her first professional century break in her 10–7 loss to Dechawat Poomjaeng, becoming the first woman to do so in this event since 2002. Storm0005 (talk) 10:52, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

That would probably be pretty good. We should say "the event", not "this event" as the former means the World Championships as a whole, rather than the 2023 event. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Qualifying Stage Centuries

The list of Qualifying Stage Centuries is at odds with the total showing at the top. The total says 105 (as per the total shown on the WST Centuries page [7], however, the list below this has 106 centuries, with the WST list missing Alexander Ursenbacher's 129 in frame 13 against Alfie Burden in the second qualifying round (https://livescores.worldsnookerdata.com/Matches/Result/14623/911769/cazoo-world-championship-2023-qualifiers) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steveflan (talk • contribs) 08:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• We report what the source says, even if it's wrong. We should remove any century breaks if they aren't reported in the full list, unless another source counts that century break. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

  hi 2409:40C2:300C:4AB2:5483:A5FF:FE08:E5F7 (talk) 16:32, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Walden's fluke

In the Judgement Day section, there's no mention of Un-Nooh's outrageous opening fluke in the decider and this omission may skew the reader's opinion into believing Ricky's taking part this year purely by a stroke of luck. Splićanin (talk) 23:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

we are hardly going to talk about every fluke in every match. Walden's fluke was relevant, as it was almost (if not the actual) match ball. It's also what the sources are talking about Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:27, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I tried to keep the qualifying summaries as concise as possible — so the Judgement Day section summarizes the outcomes of 16 best-of-19-frame matches in two paragraphs, devoting a sentence or two to each. Therefore, it comments on individual shots only when they happened at pivotal moments in the match, e.g., Walden's fluke, Saengkham's pot on the black, or Davis's missed pink. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware of all that, I'm not blind. Surely you could have written something along the lines of his later fluke offsetting the initial Thepchaiya's fluke, but whatever. Splićanin (talk) 21:54, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

It hardly did that though. In a 19 frame match there loads of flukes and interesting moments. Crazy to overdo this on the qualifiers. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Wait, you say it's crazy to mention a fluke yet there it is in the article. Not sure why there isn't room for one more, especially since both were in the decider and the article makes it look as if Ricky fluked his way into the main draw. Splićanin (talk) 04:22, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't find any articles claiming that Walden's fluke was "offset" by Thepchaiya's fluke earlier in the frame. That would appear to be your own personal opinion, which is all very well — but we have to use reliable published sources here. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 10:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Having tied the score in flukes in the decider at 1, it's more than just my opinion — it is a fact, mister. Splićanin (talk) 04:22, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

please drop the stick. It would be excessive to mention every fluke. We mention one that is practically match ball, which the citations do too. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:52, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Posting interim scores

Last year, we agreed that we could post interim scores following the conclusion of a session, the rationale being that matches extend from 2 to 4 sessions, and reliable sources are publishing updates after sessions conclude. Can we do this this year? I appreciate that we don't want the score updated after each frame, but after each session seems reasonable. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

That's pretty much my understanding of how this works. It's not in play, so it's not being immediately updated.

We did have this, before an IP wanted to update frame-by-frame and then removed the paused scores when reverted. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:20, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Perhaps we should seek to update WP:LIVESCORES, which states "The current consensus is to not add visible match or frame scores to an article until the match or tie is completed. Wikipedia should only record the final results of the match, and is not a live scoring service as Wikipedia is not the place for news reports ... Only three editors participated in the discussion so the decision may need to be revisited at some point" BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:25, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @BennyOnTheLoose. It might be good to revisit that discussion. The "no live scores" policy is especially relevant for the World Championship, which has multi-session matches extending over days. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

It's actually used outside snooker as well, at WP:FOOTY they don't update football matches in progress (with scorers etc), but would update a two-legged tie that was played on aggregate, which is pretty much identical to what we are talking about here.

There's no reason not to update a static score that will update a day (or more) later. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm wondering what happens when the second or later session is in play. Do we then remove the previous end-of-session score or do we leave it in place. If the latter, then it's going to tempt users to do live updates. Nigej (talk) 15:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

we've always historically left them in place. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:24, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Just for clarity, is it fine to update the frame-by-frame box for the final at the end of each frame, as I was last night? I understand the consensus for earlier matches in the tournament is to wait until the end, but given that there is a specific space for each frame's details for the final, it seems logical that updating at the end of each frame would be ok. douts (talk) 15:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

rankings

I went to considerable effort to add the lower ranked players' rankings to the Main Draw, why would anyone remove this info, PUT IT BACK PLEASE Nalopknowthat (talk) 13:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

It clearly says "The numbers given in brackets after the players' names show their seedings." Only the top 16 were seeded, the others were drawn randomly a few days ago. Nigej (talk) 14:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

These aren't even the rankings of the players, they are the seedings. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:07, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Nalopknowthat I ask you to stay cool and do not insult users, as you did in the edit summary. - Nabla (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Protesters vandalise table during match

This just in: https://www.bbc.com/sport/snooker/65305903

No indication yet what/why they were protesting.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Just stop oil apparently. Baffling. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:42, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Throwing powder on a snooker table will definitely stick it to the oil industry. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I wonder if this is lede worthy material? As much as I don't want to give them attention, in terms of encyclopedic content, it's up there. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree it should go in the lede as many newspapers have written about it. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 08:55, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Added short para to lead ... see what you think. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 09:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Might be a little much - probably just needs a sentence or two rather than a whole paragraph. Perhaps "The event was disrupted as two matches were delayed by Just Stop Oil protesters. One table was damaged with a session being postponed." Or similar. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Good advice. I've done something along these lines. HurricaneHiggins (talk) 23:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)