Talk:1952 World Professional Match-play Championship

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Snooker High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Snooker, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of snooker on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SnookerWikipedia:WikiProject SnookerTemplate:WikiProject SnookerSnooker articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Greater Manchester Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

	1952 World Professional Match-play 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.
	1952 World Professional Match-play Championship is part of the World Professional Match-play Championship (snooker) series, a good 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 Date Process Result October 31, 2021 Good article nominee Listed October 25, 2022 Good topic candidate Promoted
Current status: Good article

This review is transcluded from Talk:1952 World Professional Match-play Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 13:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

• I feel like you could flip the paras a bit, and have the bit about the event first, and then who won etc as a second para. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:36, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Amended as per the suggestion. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 1926–27 season - link Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Williams had turned professional in 1951, the first player since Pulman and Brown in 1946 - needs better wording Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Could we add some dates to the prose for the summary? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Amended as per three points above. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• insurmountable lead on 6 March, that the winner of their match would play him for £500 and gate receipts. - did this ever happen? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I didn't find anything in the British Newspaper Archive. I've added something based on Lindrum's account. Fred Davis wrote in Talking Snooker that Lindrum "never played competitively in Britain again" after winning the official 1952 title. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very little to critique in terms of what is here - probably could do with a bit of an expansion of information for the matches themselves, but I suspect as this was a breakaway tournament there wasn't all that much in the way of press. Happy to promote, but would suggest in looking at the suggestions above.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:43, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, Lee Vilenski - I've amended the article based on your suggestions. There is very little available coverage beyond results, e.g. nothing really in the BACC's The Billiard Player. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]