Talk:1979 World Snooker Championship

1979 World Snooker 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.
Review: August 9, 2023. (Reviewed version).

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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal 1979 World Snooker Championship is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sheffield Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sheffield, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sheffield 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.SheffieldWikipedia:WikiProject SheffieldTemplate:WikiProject SheffieldSheffield
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

state express w0rld challenge cup 1979 warley west midlands 20/101979 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.30.71.47 (talk) 10:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:1979 World Snooker Championship/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 06:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dibsing. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing this in comparison to 1980 World Snooker Championship since that's an FA and I don't know snooker very well.

1980 has a sentence about this being the preeminent snooker tournament that's absent here - not a fail criteria by any means but worth noting for consistency
1980 has the prize fund as a subsection of the overview/background - any reason this is different?
"Stevens whitewashed former champion John Pulman" - most snooker terms are helpfully linked, but not this. Can it be?
No other gripes through the Qualifying section. Prose is generally tight
"priced at 6–1" is priced an accepted synonym for having odds? I've never seen it, but then I'm not British
This article moves at a great clip. I love the way you introduce interesting details like the lager cure, but generally keep the early match summaries crisp.
Great use of the pull quote from Everton about Griffiths, I can just picture it
Again, I can find no fault with the match descriptions in the Semi-finals and Finals sections. We move along smoothly without getting bogged down in detail but without being too dry. I don't know a thing about snooker but I was able to follow the tempo of the match reasonably well.
Remainder of sections are basically statistical and are in line with the standard set by the 1980 article, so no concerns there.
Images are appropriately used, freely licensed, and properly captioned
No concerns about sourcing, which is in line with other snooker articles
Taking the offline sources on GF, I have no concerns with the spot checks on online sources
No CV or close paraphrasing issues either

There's a few nitpicks that might make the article more perfect, so to speak, but this is a clear pass in its current state. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:33, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.