Talk:Century break/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Centuries list

Isn't it time we accepted the reality that the media and WST are using https://znookerinfo.webs.com/100centuries which is currently a blacklisted page on Wikipedia (change z to s if you want to use this link). Chris Turner kept a list (https://web.archive.org/web/20120531193415/http://www.cajt.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Centuries.htm) which was last updated on 23 October 2011, shortly before his death. Snookerinfo took on Turner's list soon afterwards, see https://web.archive.org/web/20120218065003/http://znookerinfo.webs.com/ from 18 February 2012 which links to Turner's page and says "That was continually updated by Chris Turner who sadly passed away a few weeks ago, So I have decided to continue the century breaks list on my own website in the memory of him as he was the only one to do the century breaks list on the internet and I'm sure many people will still like to keep looking at this." There was a century list from as early as 12 February 2012 https://web.archive.org/web/20120218093259/http://znookerinfo.webs.com/centurybreaks.htm which is clearly Turner's list updated. Later there seemed to have been an idea to publish Turner's seasonal totals but only a few years were ever produced, see https://web.archive.org/web/20140811012846/http://znookerinfo.webs.com/centuriesbyseason.htm which says "First of all, all the totals from the 'up to 1986' page to the '2010-11' page were compiled by the late Chris Turner, so all credit goes to him for his hard work in gathering these totals over the years. All totals from the '2011-12' season were compiled by Alexandria Hassett (@snookerstats147) and all totals since then are compiled by myself and compared with CueTrackers' totals to ensure complete accuracy." Personally I can't see the point in us scouring the internet for specific references when the rest of the world is simply using this list. (I've had to change the url from the blacklisted pages, snookerinfo to znookerinfo) Nigej (talk) 06:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I would like too - but I really don't think it's actually reliable. For one, they state they check themselves against cuetracker - which we both know make errors. The other thing is that even if it didn't, how can we trust this list - if the BBC/Eurosport divulged where they got there info from, then it'd be fine. I suspect that WST has a list somewhere that they update and just don't publish, even if it is based on this page. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:12, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Snookerinfo is just as reliable in this area as Chris Turner's numbers, which we seem happy to use. Checking against against cuetracker seems sensible to me since this should flag up errors. cuetracker has errors (and different definitions of tournament categories) but that doesn't mean it can't be used for checking, it's just that its composite numbers like career totals are not suitable for use. At the moment this article is just an embarrassment, so something needs to be done. The main thing that readers want is a list of career totals. They hear it mentioned on the TV and see it in the press and for reasons that are mystery to me, we are reluctant to use the same source that they use. Nigej (talk) 09:15, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Do we have any proof that this is the list that the broadcasters use? If there is, then that's not a problem. Chris Turner is generally deemed ok, due to his status. To my knowledge Alexandria Hassett has never worked with any external company. These are the questions that would be asked if we were to use such a citation. I know everyone wants a reliable source, but there are some bottom lines that we need to meet. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

All sources are going to have errors, and there is no one authority that will tell us absolutely which events to include. I find WP:NOTTRUTH a great source of comfort. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:56, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't think there's any proof, but when a number is quoted it always matches that at snookerinfo. My worry is that we're operating a system of double standards. Chris Turner is OK but Adam whateverhisnameis is not. An error like that found recently in the 1972 World Snooker Championship final, which seems to be a slip of Clive Everton's in Snooker Scene is seen as just that, but a mistake amongst the millions of numbers in cuetracker is seen as an indication that it is riddled with inaccuracies. Nigej (talk) 11:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't have any particular thoughts on the accuracy of the information itself- just that we need a reason to believe something is likely reliable. There's loads of reasons why something might be a RS - usually this is because they have an editorial roll, but in the case of Turner, someone who specifically did this job at Eurosport. The thing to remember is that we aren't just having to convince other cue sports editors, but also that this would be reliable for anyone to agree.

I don't have any thoughts on cuetracker - the blacklisting was well before my time - but if the BBC or Eurosport specifically said they used this site to check century breaks, I'd call for it to be whitelisted (at least for use in this context). Maybe we should specifically ask where the info comes from (I'm gonna send a tweet out to Dave Hendon and see if there is some info on this.) Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Snookerinfo is at times inconsistent with the BBC and WPBSA as I note at #Fansites_being_used_as_sources (see the Steve Davis figure). I support the removal of the secondary list. Self-published content is generally not OK, unless the person is acknowledged as an expert. Eurosport used to source their stats from Chris Turner, which was why his content was often considered a reasonable exemption to WP:SPS, but even his list is no longer used as a source for totals in this article. These lists are often contradictory (I have never found one that completely mirrors the figures that pop up on the BBC) so I think pursuit of a comprehensive authoritative list is perhaps beyond our means at the moment. A "century of centuries" is pretty arbitrary and indiscriminate when you think about it. Personally I would set the threshold at 500 breaks; any breaks above that seem to be accurately reported and we can be reasonably sure they are up to date. The snooker article rely on too much fan data—which may well be accurate—but it skirts the grey areas of Wikipedia policy. Betty Logan (talk) 13:17, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

The problem with your Steve Davis example is that it shows that the BBC and WPBSA have at times simply copied the cuetracker total. The Chris Turner total here (when he died) https://web.archive.org/web/20120531193415/http://www.cajt.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Centuries.htm is 325, which converts to 338 at the end of his career, per snookerinfo. So on that basis it's cuetracker that's reliable and Chris Turner thats not. The plain fact is that snookerinfo is the most reliable source there is. We can either use it or scrap the idea completely. Personally I don't see any sense in going for 500. Just scrap the lot, if we're going down that route. Nigej (talk) 13:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

On the other hand the BBC and World Snooker do not appear to have used Cuetracker for their Hendry total. The fact is none of these sources fully match the figures the BBC use; they may have used different sources at different times. The problem I have with deferring to a fansite is that it is difficult to defend when the governing body and the BBC serve up conflicting figures. Without knowing for sure that the 338 figure for Davis is correct and 355 is wrong, how can we defend using a figure from a fansite? That's not to say the fan site is wrong, but it needs to be defendable. And what is the defence here: a fan has taken over a list maintained by someone who died ten years ago and diligantly updated it. It may be spot on, but we could easily do that ourselves on Wikipedia and cut out the middle man, but we would definitely be in original research territory with that because we would be directly creating content. It seems to me we have ended up on the wrong side of Wikipedia policy because we are attempting to do something that we are unable to do with the conventional sources that are available. Betty Logan (talk) 14:23, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't really go on the "fansite" angle. You could equally well argue that "Snooker Scene" is a "fan magazine" and dismiss that too. Nigej (talk) 15:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Snooker Scene isn't a "fan magazine". As a start, it has an editorial board, a company behind it, and was founded 50 years ago by a journalist and professional snooker player. I am not aware of any fansite that is held to the same standards (at least on paper; I can't speak about the quality of Snooker Scene from personal experience). Renerpho (talk) 16:16, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

It's weird to see a list containing only about a third of the reported players to have passed the century of centuries mark. I have a hard time believing that EVEN unreliable lists are so off that reported players with over 250 hits can't be included in a list of those above 100. 2A02:2F0B:B407:BD00:C027:E3F4:FD7C:4983 (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

If it's unreliable, we should never use it. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 05:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

My issue is that snookerinfo is not unreliable. Apart from a couple of old examples where journalists used cuetracker, in all other cases the numbers used by WST/Eurosport/BBC etc always match exactly. Clearly these organisations are using snookerinfo (either formally or simply using the data as we might do). The most recent addition here, Trump's 850th, exactly matches snookerinfo, cuetracker had 849. Nigej (talk) 05:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Bingham's 600th

I can't find a reliable source for Stuart Bingham's 600th century, to use as a citation for both this article and the Championship League article, so I have added a {{cn}} to both.
Can anybody help?  Alan  (talk) 08:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I have added a Twitter ref (found by KDayne) which will do until something better can be found.  Alan  (talk) 09:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Twitter ref now replaced with snooker.org ref, since Hermund Årdalen has updated the page.  Alan  (talk) 09:33, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

As a tip, if a century count is reported on TV but you can't find a non-broadcast reference for it, you can cite the broadcast directly using {{cite episode}}. Betty Logan (talk) 13:27, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Betty, good tip. But I'd rather rely on Hermund Årdalen at snooker.org. I asked him this morning to add Mark Williams 600th to this page for the 2023 International Championship and he did it straight away.  Alan  (talk) 13:42, 12 January 2025 (UTC)