Talk:2026 in PDC

Dom Taylor

@Bbt400 Firstly WP:VERIFIABILITYNOTTRUTH applies.

Secondly, even tho we know Taylor was ranked 64th on the live ranking for a time, he never actually ended the year there. He never actually received the world championship prize money even though it was there on the live ranking. Dom Taylor has never actually been in the top 64 on the PDC Order of Merit after a tournament.

Thirdly, Dom Taylor is ranked 68th post World Championship, having been 65th pre-World Championship. He was not the highest ranked player post World Championship to lose their card. We should not be adding things that could confuse or mislead the reader. DartsF4 (talk) 12:19, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

@Bbt400 with the statement from the DRA now I think your claim is now verifiable.

They say "As a result of this finding, Taylor will forfeit his £25,000 prize money earned at the World Championship and move down the ranking list. This means that he loses his Tour Card."

Which verifies the claim and would no longer mislead the reader if explained and presented properly.

Pinging @Greenflipper as an interested editor for his thoughts on whether and how this should be implemented on the page. DartsF4 (talk) 22:15, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

It was the right thing to wait for confirmation on the prize money situation. I can understand Bbt400's interpretation, but I wouldn't say it's correct to say Vandenbogaerde "replaced" him, more so he was just the beneficiary of Taylor not finishing in the top 64 after all was said and done. I would only use that phrasing if Taylor had finished inside the top 64 but the PDC decided to relinquish his Tour Card anyway. Greenflipper (talk) 22:26, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Yeah the phrasing I still agree is incorrect. The principle is correct when WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH is applied, that it should probably be included– as long as it’s in a way that won’t confuse or mislead the reader.

But I was not going to add anything without getting another view on this first.

Given the DRA statement, the claim that Dom Taylor should be mentioned in that table is probably correct and most importantly verifiable now. It's just how we mention it and what WP:DUEWEIGHT we give it. It needs to be explained and presented well and with WP:NPOV if included. I think given its coverage and what the DRA said it probably would be right to mention it now. But the '65th seed' stuff is still completely unverifiable and incorrect.

The Taylor lost his card because his world championship money wasn't applied is now verifiable. I agree with Greenflipper that Vandenbogaerde didn't replace Taylor as I said before Taylor was never in that top 64 at the end of the tournament. Vandenbogaerde maintained his place in the top 64, he did not lose it and regain it. Saying he would and pointing to the live rankings would not be correct as live rankings are provisional and not final until the conclusion of a tournament.

I think the mention should be brief and concise if there is one. Simply just pointing it out and explaining it. DartsF4 (talk) 22:34, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Tables

Are the prize money and format columns necessary in the tournament tables? The ranked majors table is already quite wide, I think they could be removed. Greenflipper (talk) 20:08, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I think the average reader is capable of clicking on the wikilink for the page if they wanted to get the info for them, so yeah they’re probably not absolutely necessary here DartsF4 (talk) 22:25, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Global boost reference dead

@Greenflipper Do we have an alternative reference we could use as the global boost one is dead or should the global boost be converted to an archived version? DartsF4 (talk) 18:29, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

This one? It works fine for me Greenflipper (talk) 18:52, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Works fine for me as well now, must have been a temporary issue DartsF4 (talk) 19:02, 9 March 2026 (UTC)