CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

1996 Charity Challenge

snooker tournament

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 3, 2024
Entity authorityQ4036059 ↗
Source-derived summary

The 1996 Liverpool Victoria Charity Challenge was the second edition of the professional invitational snooker tournament, which took place in January 1996. The tournament was played at the International Convention Centre in Birmingham, England, and featured sixteen professional players.

Ronnie O'Sullivan won the title, beating John Higgins 9–6 in the final.

Editorial summary

“1996 Charity Challenge” enters the record as snooker tournament. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Charity, Challenge and snooker can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1996—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Charity, Challenge and snooker.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“1996 Charity Challenge” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Charity, Challenge and snooker provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 3, 2024. The linked authority identifier is Q4036059. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1996.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “1996 Charity Challenge”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow 1996 Charity Challenge primary sources, 1996 Charity Challenge archive and Charity research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1996 Charity Challenge”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “1996 Charity Challenge” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.