Talk:David Gray (snooker)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Snooker, an attempt to improve Wikipedia's coverage of snooker. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

Find sources: David Gray snooker — news, books, scholar

[edit] Group stage

The "group stage" overly-detailed explanation which I pruned, should actually probably be explained in even more detail at the Snooker world rankings article's discussion of the tournaments. The information is valuable, but doesn't belong in that much detail in a player bio. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I tried to clarify the "group stage" thing in brief, it was a round robin experiment that was never used thereafter; but I can't see any reason to put this definition in full into the Snooker world rankings article as this was unique to this one tournament.

Also, isn't the "session to spare" expression self-explanatory? It's used a lot in snooker commentary

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.63.116.72 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Point 1: Fair enough; the article about that season or this tournament should go into it though, because it was unusual. I.e., it does need to be documented at Wikpedia somewhere, but not in great depth in a player bio. Point 2: I've been editing these articles for 2 years, and I play snooker, a little (pool mostly), but that phrase means nothing to me at all, ergo it probably won't mean anything to most readers, only to already-knowledgeable hardcore snooker fans, who are not WP's principal audience. I think it is a Briticism, or rather a WPBSAism. The BCA's defintion of snooker (which is of course only definitive in the US and perhaps explanatory in a sense of why there have never been any US snooker world champ contenders, versus Canadian ones who follow the WPBSA rules...) Anyway the point is it needs some kind of explication, and this might be best done at WP:CUEGLOSS, handled here with a "{{Cuegloss|Session|session}}" link.

OK good point, I never thought of that, I've put a definition of "session (snooker)" and "session to spare" onto WP:CUEGLOSS, the latter of which I have included in the definition that this expression is generally used in Britain but not internationally.

As for the round robin tournament, perhaps a the same as you suggested with "session" (i.e., a Cuegloss link?) referring to the 2006-2007 season or the 2006 Grand Prix if any such articles do presently exist?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.63.116.72 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Cuegloss addition; will check and make sure it is in the article in a moment. For round-robin, that concept already has its own article, and I think we are now linking to it. What I meant above was that the unusual nature of this particular tournment should be documented somewhere (somewhere other than a bio article, such as an article about that particular tournament series, or about the ranking tournaments system in general. It's not really a "term" per se, so it's not a good WP:CUEGLOSS addition. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, have got your mesage and apologise for removing the clarify flags, but I thought I had clarified the matter, otherwise I would not have done so

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.23.246 (talk • contribs) 18:39, 6 August 2007

Noted; I'll remove the warning code since your edits were in good faith. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Are User:82.15.23.246 and User:194.63.116.72 the same person? I'm having trouble remembering who I'm talking to about what. It would be grand if you (both?) registered a real user account, and joined WP:SNOOKER (see WP:SNOOKER#Particpants). — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I've now registered as a user in my own right - the reason I had two usernames coming up before I registered was because I editted the articles from two different PCs! (D-Weaving 13:19, 07 August 2007 (UTC))