Revision as of 02:36, 12 March 2013 editIhardlythinkso (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers75,330 edits →OGBranniff AfD criteria: still waiting← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 22:05, 30 December 2024 edit undoZ1720 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators29,970 edits →Good article reassessment for World Chess Championship 1972: new sectionTag: New topic | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header|search=yes|wp=yes|WT:CHESS}} | {{Talk header|search=yes|wp=yes|WT:CHESS}} | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell| | |||
<!-- The following is a bot to automatically archive discussions inactive for 90 days. --> | |||
{{WikiProject Chess}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
}} | |||
<!-- | |||
The following is a bot to automatically archive discussions inactive for 90 days. | |||
-->{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|maxarchivesize = 100K | |maxarchivesize = 100K | ||
|counter = |
|counter = 39 | ||
|algo = old(90d) | |algo = old(90d) | ||
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Chess/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Chess/Archive %(counter)d | ||
}}{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | |||
}} | |||
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot II |age=3 |units=months }} | |||
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | |||
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes | |target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes | ||
}}{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects|link=Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-01-28/WikiProject report|writer= ]| ||day =28|month=January|year=2013}} | |||
}} | |||
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Chess/Navbar|menu={{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Chess/ExtendMenu}}}} | {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Chess/Navbar|menu={{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Chess/ExtendMenu}}}} | ||
< |
<big>Skip to: ]</big> | ||
<br><br> | |||
== Was there a unicode chess piece symbol there? == | |||
Am confused, at all the piece articles (e.g. ]), the lead sentence has parens ( ) after the piece name, but on my screen, it is just blanks. (Was there previously a symbol there? What happened? I don't understand the unicode template either, it seems to be without a parameter. But edit history doesn't tell me what was there.) Am totally confused, can someone explain? Thx. ] (]) 02:15, 16 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Here I can see piece symbols between the brackets. So question becomes why does your computer not display them. Perhaps ask at ]. Regards, ]<sup>(])</sup> 02:25, 16 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
::Sun Creator, thanks for the reply, it helps to know problem is isolated to my computer (browser, font, WP preference setting, etc.). I need to work on this. Thx again, ] (]) 19:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
:I know I’m late here, but it’s not just you; in Safari on Mac OS 10.6.8 with several fonts containing the character “♘”, that symbol is blank in both the article and the edit page. Not sure what I can do about it. It does show in Firefox, though. —] (]) 05:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
::Discovered, under Firefox, can only see the unicode by switching to MS Gothic (Tools→Options→Default font). Doesn't show if Arial. (Unfortunate, since Arial reads better than MS Gothic, for general purpose.) ] (]) 05:45, 24 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== PGN viewer == | |||
many of you guys are familiar with "pgn viewers" that exists outside wikipedia. | |||
there is even a mediawiki extension that implements a pgn viewer. unfortunately, as code goes, the probability of this extension getting actually installed on any wikimedia wiki (such as the english wikipedia) is very low. | |||
i developed a script that does part (most?) of what the familiar pgn viewer can do. i started a discussion about it in ], but then reslized that maybe here would be a better place. | |||
in a nutshell: look at ], and read the discussion in village pump. | |||
peace - ] (]) 15:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Amazing quality of pieces and movement. I think maybe the buttons would be better below the board. Anyway, I approve. Regards, ]<sup>(])</sup> 21:39, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
::question and comment. | |||
::*Question: how do you mean below the board? between the PGN listing and the board, or below the pgn lising itself? if the former, wouldn't the extra distance between the board and the listing be a detractor? | |||
::*Comment: note that i am not a native in enwiki - my home wiki is hewiki. my hunch is that injecting this to enwiki will require some lobying, which i am not equiped to do - i do not even know what is the next step after posting here and in wp:vp#technical. | |||
::peace - ] (]) 23:56, 6 November 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::I believe Sun Creator means the buttons should go below the diagram. I agree. I've read the Village Pump dialogue, I agree there needs to be a "back button" as well. (This is useful to easily back up and analyze a move; the back button is also useful to repeatedly press sometimes, to back up even two or more moves, from the current position, it is the easiest and most intuitive method when playing over a game.) | |||
:::This type of animation is clearly "the future" for WP. (What are we waiting for?) ] (]) 02:23, 24 December 2012 (UTC) p.s. BTW the movement is great but I think the WP chess icons suck. But that is easily changed. | |||
::::FWIW, i created a proposal to use this. ]. peace - ] (]) 17:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::::So i modified the script according to the suggestions: moved the controls below the board, added a move-back-one-step button, and moved the PGN from the bottom to the left. please view it on ]. please note that this page contains huge number of games (around 100) so it may take several seconds to load. Typical chess article will likely contain much less than 100 games and hence will load quicker. | |||
:::::peace - ] (]) 05:39, 27 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
Hello, this is a fascinating PGN-viewer, and its quality and complexity for a Javascript application inside Wikimedia is like a miracle for me. | |||
I actually found this discussion here with a specific and rather useless idea in mind, that is: how could Misplaced Pages display an sample game for the longest possible chessgame, which due to the traditional ] should take 5899 moves. Now, a presentation with a ] (GIF), with one frame per half-move would take unnecessarily much storage space, and probably the number of possible frames for a GIF has a smaller upper limit (for example ] has 475 frames). On the other hand, creating a PGN file of a longest sample game would be much easier than of a GIF, and could be done half-automatized, or with copy- and paste techniques. Of course it then would be great, if it was possible to show this long game on a PGN-viewer within Misplaced Pages, Greetings ] (]) 12:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Live ratings == | |||
Unsurprisingly, the article ] is getting filled with "live rating" information, and some people have also added it to the article's infobox (which ignores it). It has also led to a modification of the article ]. Should we pay attention to it? Please discuss! :-) ] (]) 20:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
: I say stick with published ratings! ] <sup>]</sup> 20:22, 4 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
::Yeah, I agree. Perhaps a footnote about live ratings might be relevant, but it should never be published ahead or alongside of an official rating. Saying someone's live rating (in the middle of the tournament) is higher than someone's published rating is like the difference between leading a tournament after X rounds and actually winning it at the end. ] (]) 21:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
:::I don't think there was ever a reason to use live ratings in Misplaced Pages, but now that FIDE publishes ratings every month it's especially pointless. ], ], and ] apply. Normally we should be able to wait until the next month's ratings list. ] (]) 02:51, 11 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
::::Per Quale, and everyone else too. ] (]) 01:52, 24 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Peter Lalić == | |||
I have notability and COI concerns about ]. The article was mainly edited by one editor, and that editor edits almost nothing else. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
:It seems eminently deletion-worthy. ] (]) 19:18, 12 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Agreed. The lead is supposed to make clear why notable, and for e.g., there's nothing in the lead that does so. ] (]) 01:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Carlsen's rating record == | |||
When the January 2013 FIDE rating list is published, Carlsen will officially have the highest rating in history. Should this make the "In the news" section of the main page? It did report on the latest Chess Olympiad, and prominent individuals are often highlighted there (such as Ravi Shankar at the moment). I don't have any experience with nominating things for the main page, though. ] (]) 09:15, 16 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Rohini Khadilkar == | |||
Hi all, I've spent an hour trying to sort out a mess that looked like at ]. Not being a chess person, I don't understand some of the statements and have been unable to link some stuff (World Zonal Championships, for example). It is also devoid of sources, apart from a couple of not particularly useful external links. Can anyone here take this on? You'll probably know better where to look. - ] (]) 13:40, 26 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Chess in The Seventh Seal == | |||
I have just suggested on ] that the section of the article called "Chess in the film" be removed. If you are interested in the matter, please take a look at the section here: ] and drop by the talk page to make a comment. ] (]) 17:18, 30 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Final Four of College Chess == | |||
Hi guys, ] needs help in bringing up ] to ] status. He just created it through the ] initiative and might be new to Misplaced Pages so please don't bite! —] (]) 00:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:How did it make it past AFC approval without any references? ] (]) 01:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
{{awaiting}} Guys, I really really need your help with Alan. It seems that he has a lot of pictures for the Final Four but I'm not a member of this WikiProject nor have an interest on it. Could someone please help him and join us at the discussion on his talk page? Please remember that he is a newcomer and we should ]. —] (]) 18:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Without any references to independent (third-party), ], it is not yet clear if the article topic is sufficiently notable to warrant a Misplaced Pages article. I suggest getting this straightened out is much more important than providing photos for the article. ] (]) 18:36, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:: Thank you for your suggestion. May I suggest that you, being a member of this WikiProject, help in such endeavor? I will give you one to help you get started: .—] (]) 20:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::I'm not a member of this project, just a chessplayer. I might help, but am still not convinced of the subject's notability, per ]: "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail". All I can find with a Google search (other than blogs that don't quite meet the reliable source criteria) are fleeting mentions in newspaper articles. This is why this should have been resolved ''before'' the article was AFC approved; currently, the article is perhaps a candidate for ] (but that would be bitey). Maybe some of the project members have back issues to '']'', which might have an article that discusses the tournament and its history in some detail? ] (]) 21:22, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::: It's not that hard: —] (]) 21:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::Then please try harder; as has been discussed several times on ], about.com is generally not useable as a reliable source, and the author of that piece does not qualify as an expert per ]. ] (]) 22:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::: It seems that you are focused on arguing rather than on actually improving the article. Why? —] (]) 00:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Because the article was faultily approved through WP:AFC without proper sources, and then brought here with the expectation that others would clean up the mess, which wastes editor time. Did you approve this? The reviewing directions for AFC are quite clear: "References about the subject – at least one lengthy paragraph, preferably more. Not passing mentions, not directory listings, not just any old thing that happens to have the name in it. Several of them. The subject of the article must be notable." It is not yet clear that the subject of the article meets this criteria. And no, a promotional brochure does not qualify as a reliable source. ] (]) 07:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hi all, I was wondering if anyone has Agdestein's 2004 book ''Wonderboy: How Magnus Carlsen became the Youngest Chess Grandmaster in the World''. I'm planning to take the article to ] soon, but the second paragraph of "Childhood" is lacking citations (and the section could probably be expanded). Will order if no-one here has access. Thanks, ] (]) 20:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:If you want to make it a GA—which is something that I'll gladly help you with—there are multiple issues to solve. I'll post about them on the article's talk page soon. ] (]) 21:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
::That would be great – any suggestions for further improvement are appreciated! ] (]) 21:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
::I've gone ahead and nominated it for GAN, as I think it's close to fulfilling the ], and any small problems can be fixed in the wait time for review, or during the review itself. Thanks, Toccata quarta, for your continuing efforts in improving the article; this is one of the most highly-viewed chess articles so it would be nice to get it up to a good standard. After GAN I'd like to put it up for A-class review, but I'm not really sure how active this project is and whether there would be many available or willing to review it. I think a FAC nomination would not be too unrealistic, but I'd have to first track down some more literature; being fairly young, there's not a lot of books written about Carlsen, and I suspect the most useful sources would be articles in chess magazines, or ChessBase CDs. ] (]) 07:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::I have a copy of Agdestein's 2004 book ''Wonderboy: How Magnus Carlsen became the Youngest Chess Grandmaster in the World''. You should really order your own copy though. :-) Let me know if you want anything in particular cited, though maybe Toccata quarta or others have copies as well? I'll keep an eye out for the promised post on the article talk page about issues. Trying to work out what the best sources are to use post-2004 could be tricky. What you will want is the longer, more thoughtful analyses of his progress since 2004, if they aren't already used as sources. ] (]) 08:35, 6 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
This article has just been promoted to GA status! Thanks to Toccata quarta for his helpful assistance in copyediting and finding sources. I will continue working on this article with an eye to FA candidacy sometime this year; I've recently received ''Wonderboy'' and am currently reading through it for stuff to add. ] (]) 15:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== WP Chess in the ''Signpost'' == | |||
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Chess for a ''Signpost'' article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, ''']'''. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. ] (]) 04:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Is anyone interested in representing this project in the Signpost ''']'''? If not, we'll have to pick another project. ] (]) 17:40, 12 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
::Sometimes it helps to poke a bit :-). I have added some responses to the questions. ] ] 18:36, 12 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::Thanks! It looks good. ] (]) 19:00, 12 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] merge to ] == | |||
There is a disagreement at ] over whether it should be merged to ]. Anyone who has an opinion is invited to discuss it at ]. ] (]) 18:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
*I think you merging it with English Opening was very generous, for quite frankly I cannot see any coverage of this gambit even in specialized literature. I have nominated it for AFD. ] ] 18:39, 20 January 2013 (UTC)I | |||
== Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ''']''' is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
The article will be discussed at ] until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. | |||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.<!-- Template:afd-notice --> --] <sup>(]•]•]•])</sup> 18:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] needed? == | |||
I don't think we need ]. According to ], a category should be a "defining characteristic" of its subject. I don't think this category is a defining characteristic. In such cases a list is usually more appropriate than a category, and we have such a list at ]. I wanted to see what others in the project thought before nominating it at ]. What do you think? I have similar concerns about ]. ] (]) 04:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== List of officers of the Oxford University Chess Club == | |||
] was up for AfD, which closed over a week ago with the consensus to merge. The article still exists and hasn't been merged. Does someone want to do that? ] <sup>]</sup> 05:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:I would rather delete it. That's one of the great things about a "merge" outcome at AFD—Sometimes no one wants to do the work. I think one of the merge voters should be required to do it, or perhaps the person who closed it. ] (]) 05:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:: I did remind the nominator about it on his talk page. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Fischer's memory == | |||
I've read that Fischer had an amazing memory; that he remembered everything he read. I haven't been able to find a reference to that. I checked ''Endgame'' and ''Profile of a Prodigy'', but there isn't anything in the index about it. Does anyone know of a reference about Fischer's memory? ] <sup>]</sup> 01:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Chess.com == | |||
Anyone got any opinion on the recent and ongoing trash-talk and controversy about Misplaced Pages going on among "Chess.com" members on their site? Apparently they just can't understand that the "chess.com" article got deleted from Misplaced Pages in December and have been doing massive amounts of angry discussion and encouraging people to come on Misplaced Pages to disrupt it. Does anyone know about this, have any opinion about it, or about Chess.com in general? ] (]) 17:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
: I think it would be better if they boycott Misplaced Pages instead of disrupt it. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Jude Acers middle name? == | |||
What is the middle name of ]? I reverted a recent change based on , but it has been changed again. ] <sup>]</sup> | |||
:I found no reliable source, so would leave it out. He is known as Jude Acers on books, FIDE and USCF information so no need to use a middle name. Regards, ]<sup>(])</sup> 16:03, 16 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:: It is Frazier according to . ] <sup>]</sup> 19:55, 16 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::Well found! So you've answered your own question. Regards, ]<sup>(])</sup> 20:39, 16 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::: Actually the person that changed it, whom I reverted, was kind enough to let me know about it on my talk page. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Chess diagram using FEN == | |||
So i created a new template, {{t|Chess diagram-fen}}, which is pretty similar in capabilities to {{t|Chess diagram}}, except that you feed it the FEN string to draw the board. so instead of | |||
<nowiki>{{Chess diagram | |||
| tright | |||
| | |||
|= | |||
8 |rd|nd|bd|qd|kd|bd|nd|rd|= | |||
7 |pd|pd|pd|pd| |pd|pd|pd|= | |||
6 | | | | | | | | |= | |||
5 | | | | |pd| | | |= | |||
4 | | | | |pl|pl| | |= | |||
3 | | | | | | | | |= | |||
2 |pl|pl|pl|pl| | |pl|pl|= | |||
1 |rl|nl|bl|ql|kl|bl|nl|rl|= | |||
a b c d e f g h | |||
| The King's Gambit | |||
}}</nowiki> | |||
you write | |||
<nowiki>{{Chess diagram-fen | |||
| fen=rnbqkbnr/pppp1ppp/8/4p3/4PP2/8/PPPP2PP/RNBQKBNR | |||
| align=tright | |||
| footer=The King's Gamit | |||
}}</nowiki> | |||
i will be happy to hear what you guys think. also, let me know if there's any missing feature, or if you have problems seeing the template with any specific browser, esp. older version of IE, and any mobile browser. | |||
currently, the {{t|Chess diagram-fen}} template only deals with 8x8 boards, and does not support any of the "special" features, such as drawing X's and O's, digits, or fairy pieces. it *does* have one feature the regular template doesn't — it can display the board from the black's point of view, i.e. with h8 at the lower left corner. | |||
the main thing, in my mind, is switching from the tedious and non-standard format of ] to a standard and ubiquitous FEN notation. however, there is one additional advantage: wikipedia saves it more than twice as fast as it saves the existing template: e.g., ] contains 36 instances of ], and takes about 45 seconds to save, and in contrast ] contains 80 instances of ], and takes less than 40 seconds to save. i do not believe it's even possible to have 80 instances of ] on one page on enwiki — it would blow up with error/timeout when you try to save it. | |||
peace - ] (]) 07:49, 24 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:It's very nice! Congratulations!] (]) 14:21, 26 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
::Like ] again fascinating, ] (]) 14:59, 26 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::I'm impressed, I think this could be a good replacement for the current chess diagram template for most uses. ] (]) 05:41, 27 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
There is more discussion of it ] and | |||
]. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Notability (International Masters and chess in England) == | |||
I recently stumbled across ], a one-line stub on an English IM. It was prodded for deletion and then sourced (sort of) and the prod removed. I don't think many IMs rise to the level of notability needed for Misplaced Pages articles, but am not going to nominate it for deletion myself as there are many articles about chess in England (and the rest of the UK) that (IMO) shouldn't have articles but do (and conversely others that don't have articles that should). I'm not sure I can be fully objective about this, though, as I know some of the people in question (the same applies to ] - it was quite bizarre seeing some names there that I recognise). Would it be OK if I made a list here of various articles that might not meet notability guidelines, or would it be best to read up on any specific guideline here first? I should note that I have created a few chess-related articles art various points: ], ], ], ], ], and ]. Where would those lie on the spectrum of notability? ] (]) 02:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Sounds like a good idea; I'm all for it. Are you going to publish the list on this talk page? ] (]) 03:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
::A good start would be casting a critical eye over ], especially the living people there. When I was thinking of people who might (going by instinct, maybe not the best guide) have or should have Misplaced Pages articles who are not GMs, I thought of ] (article looks OK), ] (no article), ], ], ], and so on. One I came across that was unexpected was ] (son of GM ] and IM and WGM ]). But there are undoubtedly other articles with issues with notability as well. I suspect the same could be said for chess coverage in other countries as well, but chess in England is what I'm most familiar with. Some other articles I noticed included ], ]. There were some others, but as I said I know some of the people and I'm reluctant to name the articles as I'm not sure I can be objective (I'd either be too lenient in assessing the article subject for notability, or too harsh). ] (]) 05:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::I was inspired by your first post so I proceeded to nominate the ] article for deletion here ]. Thanks for pointing that out. I also nominated the laughably blatant advertising of ]. You know, if you identify and list any articles you feel do not meet notability, verfiability, or any other Misplaced Pages criteria, I will be more than willing to craft a policy rationale as to why they fail standards and send each and every one of them off to AFD. We could work together like the (redacted) in Germany... you investigate and identify the deficient articles, and I'll round them up and ship them off. It'll be efficient. ] (]) 06:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
i understand that this was meant as humor, but i'd like to point out that i found it offensive. Peace- ] (]) 08:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::I would like to thank Arbcom member ] for inspiring me with his initial post in this regard. I was wondering if he, or anyone else who would like to assist in this project to suggest other "categories" of chess articles that may have large numbers of notability issues. Is there a master list of categories we can peruse anywhere? It is interesting how "categorization" can lead to things being quickly identified and quickly marked for "special attention," as in cases like this. Thank you for the heads-up and inspiration. We shall make Misplaced Pages a better place, working together. ] (]) 06:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::I fail to see how a lack of information will make Misplaced Pages better. ] (]) 06:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::The removal of spurious, trivial "factoids" that fail to meet general Misplaced Pages standards of ], ], and ] is not the same as "lack of information." Like several other senior editors have said before, the chess articles here do not receive a "special pass" on flouting Misplaced Pages policy. Thank you. ] (]) 06:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hello. This chess related article is being discussed for deletion, comments at ] are welcome. --] (] / ]) 16:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
== should this be merged? == | |||
], ], and ] have been merged into ]. ] is a title, but there is also a general notion of what a chess master is, predating the official titles. I do not think that it should be merged like this. ] <sup>]</sup> 00:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:Personally, I like separate articles on the titles myself. I say we just keep the items separate until there is a rational consensus to merge, eh? ] (]) 01:20, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:I also checked the article for ] and it redirects to Chess titles. What's up with that; shouldn't National Master have a standalone article as well? There are National masters from many nations, not just the USA. ] (]) 01:21, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:: Those articles were merged by another editor a short time ago. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:23, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
:: ] redirects to ], which is not exactly the same as ]. I think there is a confusing mess that needs to be cleaned up. ] <sup>]</sup> 01:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
I thought it was a bit odd that we didn't have a standalone article on Q vs R, so I spent today procrastinating by writing one based on the first few sources I thought of looking up (Nunn, Müller and Lamprecht, Averbakh ''Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge'' – though the last one is old enough that it entertainingly says absolutely nothing about the third-rank defense, so it wasn't very helpful). Probably it could stand to have more about Q vs R+P (which is better covered in Dvoretsky), but I should stop procrastinating. :D ] (]) 15:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I think then we should bust it up, re-separate the articles. I am thinking about writing the "National Master" article. ] (]) 06:45, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Medal Table == | |||
:::: '''Chess Master''' should definitely have its on article because it is a general term, and "chess master" is not a formal title. The others are debatable. ] <sup>]</sup> 03:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
I have noticed that @] has been adding medal tables for ], ] and other chess ones for only Indian chess players. See ], ] etc. | |||
I restored ] to the way it was, but I left ] alone (for now). ] <sup>]</sup> 02:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
Can I confirm if there has been any consensus amongst the chess community on wiki if we should add such medals to the medal table? For example if we use Olympiad medals, we will have to add them to pretty much all medalists. We can't just do it for Indians player because this wouldn't be fair otherwise and can be seen as breaching ] and ]. | |||
== ] == | |||
The only one I have seen used consistently is ] so far. | |||
] <span style="border-radius:8em;padding:2px 5px;background:#0151D2;font-size:75%">]</span> 07:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
Note that a chess-related biography is being discussed for deletion at ] ] (]) 22:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:There was a discussion of medal tables for articles about chess players in ] It was not a popular idea at the time. Although chess players who win medals value them, credentials and other criteria for judging a player's success and strength tend to run to FIDE title, ratings, championships won, etc. ] (]) 17:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
::I will take it then to be consistent, we should just remove all chess medal tables then? | |||
::I am ok with stuff like ] and ] which are multi-event and measured by medals. But not with putting stuff like Olympiads where there is no precedence to do so. ] <span style="border-radius:8em;padding:2px 5px;background:#0151D2;font-size:75%">]</span> 01:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::], ] and Continental Team Chess Championships are the long-established major team events in chess, held once in a fixed duration, and of sufficient importance that the teams are selected by the national chess federations and the results covered in media. Almost all the best players take part in it, with rare exceptions. | |||
:::] is a recent and intermittent addition to the chess calendar, but still gets sufficient coverage due to the notability of the ], and the chess players involved too. From what I see, strong Asian chess nations like India, China, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Iran have invariably fielded their best players at these events. There are other multi-sport events such as ] and ] which have included chess. | |||
:::In my opinion, these two categories of events should be present in medal templates as they are fundamentally about medals (gold, silver, bronze medals are actually awarded), and strong and important enough for medals won at these events to be mentioned in templates. | |||
:::World Championships are obviously worthy of a template. The conventional chess tournaments such as round robins (Sinquefield Cup, Tata Steel etc), Swisses (Aeroflot Open, Qatar Masters, national championships etc) and knockouts (American Cup, Speed Chess Championships), do not deserve a medal template as only the 1st place matters. These can perhaps be mentioned in a text section called "notable tournaments won" for prominent players, but WITHOUT a medal template. Also, perhaps specific FIDE tournaments such as FIDE World Cup, FIDE Grand Swiss, FIDE Grand Prix and FIDE Candidates can be mentioned in templates. ] (]) 01:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Also, the presence of chess Olympiad medal templates is not unique to Indian chess players. For example, see ] and ]. ] (]) 01:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::@] Any thoughts on this? ] <span style="border-radius:8em;padding:2px 5px;background:#0151D2;font-size:75%">]</span> 01:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::I recognize that, for our chess biographies as a whole, we do not have a consistent system for summarizing a player's major achievements in an easy to read form. For instance, in ] we have a table of all his tournament finishes, but if the reader wants only to see his major successes, this table is too much. For most other players we don't have anything, and the reader can only try to digest the flat year-by-year narrative of the player's career. | |||
::::::So a medal template for the infobox is an attempt to solve a genuine problem. But it has several flaws. | |||
::::::A team medal earned in a team event may not reflect the player's performance; for example, if he fell sick and only played one game, he still gets the medal. | |||
::::::A board prize earned in a team event may have been earned by facing a weak field. For example, the silver medal for second board in the recent Olympiad was won by a player who faced only eight opponents, of whom only three were rated above 2500. | |||
::::::Most of the strongest tournaments do not award medals at all. | |||
::::::Your suggestion of a "notable tournaments won" section could help with this. I assume that what you have in mind is something like ]. I am dissatisfied that the medal table in the infobox and the notable tournaments section in the article text are not near to each other -- we almost make matters worse by putting them in places that do not have equal prominence and are not near to each other. ] (]) 05:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::: The medals infobox is an abomination. All the arguments from 2018 against the medals infobox are still valid, but seeing it in practice shows it is actually worse than I thought. | |||
::::::: Making this so prominent in articles is ] since Misplaced Pages is placing importance on the medals that does not exist in the English-speaking chess world. (I'm not going to presume what importance the medals have in other parts of the world.) Compare the medals box for ] and ]. The medals infoboxes do not convey any useful insight into their relative accomplishments, and in fact they actively obfuscate. Bloated infoboxes at the top of an article do not have the effect that is likely intended, rather they appear sad and a little desperate. If the achievements are important they should be described in prose in the article body. I may be in the minority, but I expect Misplaced Pages to be an encyclopedia, not an infoboxopedia. | |||
::::::: The medal boxes are bloated and the effect on some articles is just ghastly. For example, take a look again at the ] article. You might think it isn't too bad, but I invite you to view that page on a phone. The infoboxes take the entire width of small screens so on a phone you must scroll down several screens to reach the article proper. I also think there are some issues with accessibility and legibility of the medals infobox. The medals are in small coins that are difficult to distinguish at low resolution, and the contrast differences between the medal colors are relatively low. | |||
::::::: Rather than jamming these monstrosities at the top of the article I think it works better to use a standard wiki table to present tournament and match results near the end of the article. An example of this that I like is ]. The regular table format allows inclusion of a lot more information and in a format that is easier to understand. Placing a potentially large table near the end of an article is much better than putting it at the top and before the article body. | |||
::::::: I am strongly opposed to use of any medals infobox in chess biographies, and I think they should be removed. ] (]) 07:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::::I'm inclined to agree. Chess in general doesn't put a lot of emphasis on "medals". I don't really care if someone got a "bronze medal" at the Vietnamese Team Championship. They can be mentioned in the article, but shouldn't be in the infobox. ] (]) 00:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Should we add this as a guideline to the WikiProject front page? | |||
:::::::::We probably also need to add a cleanup project since there are a lot of players to be dealt with. ] <span style="border-radius:8em;padding:2px 5px;background:#0151D2;font-size:75%">]</span> 01:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Live rating being added by unregistered users despite being against guidelines == | |||
An AfD related to this project. <font face="Century Gothic">](])</font> 12:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
I have observed that live ratings are being constantly added to pages such as ] as well as player pages such as ] and ] despite being against WikiProject Chess guidelines. Markdown flags such as "DO NOT ADD LIVE RATING" have been placed on such pages to no avail. | |||
== AFD of historic masters == | |||
I wonder if the issue can be tackled by adding semi-protection or pending changes protection (See ]). At least the ] page, a target of frequent vandalism by unregistered users, is worthy of it. ] (]) 01:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
There has been a batch of AFD's all with the same rational that fail is grasp the historical context of older chess masters. The grandmaster title started in 1950 so those of a previous era won't any such official title. If a worlds top 100 player from pre-1900 are not notable it's going to put consider impact on deleting grandmaster of the current era, some of which would NOT make the worlds top 1000 players. Regards, ]<sup>(])</sup> 12:40, 9 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
== Requested move at ] == | |||
== OGBranniff AfD criteria == | |||
] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran ] 21:27, 13 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
== FICS at AfD == | |||
User:OGBranniff, curious to know your opinion regarding the notability of this person: ]. (Notable? Why or why not?) ] (]) 06:05, 10 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:User:OGBranniff, did you forget to answer? All I've asked here is for your opinion re notability, the same as the evaluations you gave in the 18 AfDs you recently submitted. (That seemed like breeze-work for you, so, I don't think this one additional article should represent any extra special effort on your part.) ] (]) 02:36, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
Of possible interest to this WikiProject: ] — <samp>] <sup style="font-size:80%;">]</sup></samp> \\ 00:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Inappropriate == | |||
== PGN in articles on games == | |||
Does anyone else think that is not an appropriate level of discourse for the front page of a public discussion board that is visited by women and children? ] (]) 21:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:IMO, it's beyond inappropriate. ] (]) 21:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
For some reason someone added the PGN to the article ]. I don't really see any value in it, and I don't want this to become standard for articles about famous games. ] (]) 11:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
: I don't think it is appropriate. ] <sup>]</sup> 21:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
: |
:Since we are already linking to the chessgames.com version in the External Links section, the raw PGN doesn't add any value. ] (]) 18:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
== Good article reassessment for ] == | |||
::But, why do you not find it appropriate or acceptable? Nobody has advanced any rationale behind their opinion. I don't see anything wrong with it myself. It's true, to the point, and describes my lifestyle and interests. What's the problem? ] (]) 22:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 22:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Read what Sasata wrote. And get a ]. Here's a quote from you: ] (]) 23:48, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::Where is there any evidence that "women and children" visit that page, or more specifically, closely read it? Even if they do, "Misplaced Pages is ]." Jimmy Wales himself would back me up on this issue and you know it. Thank you. ] (]) 23:51, 11 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::Then tell us why you redacted . ] (]) 00:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::I opened a discussion about OGBranniff's behavior at ]. ] (]) 00:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Talking about Nazis and the SS is a bit different than talking about sluts. ] (]) 00:49, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::How are they different in relation to the ] argument you brought up? And, you failed to answer my Q: <u>Why</u> did you redact? ] (]) 00:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Because I chose to self-censor myself in the first comment and am choosing not to in the second. You really are dense, aren't you? ] (]) 01:07, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::Sometimes I'm dense, yes. But not at the moment. You still didn't answer my Q: <u>Why</u> did you redact? (You only stated that you "chose to" redact. Of course you chose to, else you wouldn't have. I'm asking you why you chose to. Please answer this time, without insulting further.) ] (]) 01:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::The answer is in my response of 00:49 above. Thank you. ] (]) 01:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::You're saying at 00:49 that the comments were "different". (No contest there -- they are different.) But that does not answer what it was about the first comment that caused you to decide to redact. (Saying it's "different" from a comment you did not redact, does not explain your reason for redacting. Please explain that reason, and quit dodging my Q.) ] (]) 01:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::::Figure it out yourself, kid. If you want everything spelled out to you in small bite size kindergarten-level chunks I'm not going to play along. Why don't you tone it down a bit, will you, while we are at it? "quit dodging my Q," as if your queries were a life and death situation or you're the chairman of some Senate investigation. Grow up. Thank you. ] (]) 01:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::::You already said I was "dense", so, go ahead, spell it out for me. (<u>Why</u> did you choose to redact the Nazi comment?) ] (]) 02:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::::Regarding "tone it down a bit, will you?", do you mean, like in your edit summary !? ] (]) 02:16, 12 March 2013 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 22:05, 30 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Chess and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
WikiProject Chess was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 28 January 2013. |
WikiProject Chess Shortcut: WP:CHESS | |||||||||||||||
Navigation Menu | |||||||||||||||
Project Page | talk | ||||||||||||||
Assessment | talk | ||||||||||||||
Assessment statistics | talk | ||||||||||||||
Review | talk | ||||||||||||||
Chess Portal | talk | ||||||||||||||
|
Skip to: the bottom of page to add a new topic or see most recent new topics
Queen versus rook endgame
I thought it was a bit odd that we didn't have a standalone article on Q vs R, so I spent today procrastinating by writing one based on the first few sources I thought of looking up (Nunn, Müller and Lamprecht, Averbakh Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge – though the last one is old enough that it entertainingly says absolutely nothing about the third-rank defense, so it wasn't very helpful). Probably it could stand to have more about Q vs R+P (which is better covered in Dvoretsky), but I should stop procrastinating. :D Double sharp (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Medal Table
I have noticed that @Vajrayudhan has been adding medal tables for Chess Olympiad, World Team Chess Championship and other chess ones for only Indian chess players. See Gukesh Dommaraju, Surya Shekhar Ganguly etc.
Can I confirm if there has been any consensus amongst the chess community on wiki if we should add such medals to the medal table? For example if we use Olympiad medals, we will have to add them to pretty much all medalists. We can't just do it for Indians player because this wouldn't be fair otherwise and can be seen as breaching WP:NPOV and WP:PROMO. The only one I have seen used consistently is Asian Games so far.
Imcdc Contact 07:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- There was a discussion of medal tables for articles about chess players in Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Chess/Archive 34#Medal template for Infobox chess biography. It was not a popular idea at the time. Although chess players who win medals value them, credentials and other criteria for judging a player's success and strength tend to run to FIDE title, ratings, championships won, etc. Bruce leverett (talk) 17:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- I will take it then to be consistent, we should just remove all chess medal tables then?
- I am ok with stuff like Asian Games and FISU World University Games which are multi-event and measured by medals. But not with putting stuff like Olympiads where there is no precedence to do so. Imcdc Contact 01:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Chess Olympiad, World Team Chess Championship and Continental Team Chess Championships are the long-established major team events in chess, held once in a fixed duration, and of sufficient importance that the teams are selected by the national chess federations and the results covered in media. Almost all the best players take part in it, with rare exceptions.
- Asian Games chess is a recent and intermittent addition to the chess calendar, but still gets sufficient coverage due to the notability of the Asian Games, and the chess players involved too. From what I see, strong Asian chess nations like India, China, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Iran have invariably fielded their best players at these events. There are other multi-sport events such as Summer Universiade and Asian Indoor and Martial Arts Games which have included chess.
- In my opinion, these two categories of events should be present in medal templates as they are fundamentally about medals (gold, silver, bronze medals are actually awarded), and strong and important enough for medals won at these events to be mentioned in templates.
- World Championships are obviously worthy of a template. The conventional chess tournaments such as round robins (Sinquefield Cup, Tata Steel etc), Swisses (Aeroflot Open, Qatar Masters, national championships etc) and knockouts (American Cup, Speed Chess Championships), do not deserve a medal template as only the 1st place matters. These can perhaps be mentioned in a text section called "notable tournaments won" for prominent players, but WITHOUT a medal template. Also, perhaps specific FIDE tournaments such as FIDE World Cup, FIDE Grand Swiss, FIDE Grand Prix and FIDE Candidates can be mentioned in templates. Vajrayudhan (talk) 01:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also, the presence of chess Olympiad medal templates is not unique to Indian chess players. For example, see Vasyl Ivanchuk and Ruslan Ponomariov. Vajrayudhan (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bruce leverett Any thoughts on this? Imcdc Contact 01:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- I recognize that, for our chess biographies as a whole, we do not have a consistent system for summarizing a player's major achievements in an easy to read form. For instance, in Magnus Carlsen we have a table of all his tournament finishes, but if the reader wants only to see his major successes, this table is too much. For most other players we don't have anything, and the reader can only try to digest the flat year-by-year narrative of the player's career.
- So a medal template for the infobox is an attempt to solve a genuine problem. But it has several flaws.
- A team medal earned in a team event may not reflect the player's performance; for example, if he fell sick and only played one game, he still gets the medal.
- A board prize earned in a team event may have been earned by facing a weak field. For example, the silver medal for second board in the recent Olympiad was won by a player who faced only eight opponents, of whom only three were rated above 2500.
- Most of the strongest tournaments do not award medals at all.
- Your suggestion of a "notable tournaments won" section could help with this. I assume that what you have in mind is something like Vasyl Ivanchuk#Notable tournament victories. I am dissatisfied that the medal table in the infobox and the notable tournaments section in the article text are not near to each other -- we almost make matters worse by putting them in places that do not have equal prominence and are not near to each other. Bruce leverett (talk) 05:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- The medals infobox is an abomination. All the arguments from 2018 against the medals infobox are still valid, but seeing it in practice shows it is actually worse than I thought.
- Making this so prominent in articles is undue weight since Misplaced Pages is placing importance on the medals that does not exist in the English-speaking chess world. (I'm not going to presume what importance the medals have in other parts of the world.) Compare the medals box for Viswanathan Anand and Savitha Shri Baskar. The medals infoboxes do not convey any useful insight into their relative accomplishments, and in fact they actively obfuscate. Bloated infoboxes at the top of an article do not have the effect that is likely intended, rather they appear sad and a little desperate. If the achievements are important they should be described in prose in the article body. I may be in the minority, but I expect Misplaced Pages to be an encyclopedia, not an infoboxopedia.
- The medal boxes are bloated and the effect on some articles is just ghastly. For example, take a look again at the Savitha Shri Baskar article. You might think it isn't too bad, but I invite you to view that page on a phone. The infoboxes take the entire width of small screens so on a phone you must scroll down several screens to reach the article proper. I also think there are some issues with accessibility and legibility of the medals infobox. The medals are in small coins that are difficult to distinguish at low resolution, and the contrast differences between the medal colors are relatively low.
- Rather than jamming these monstrosities at the top of the article I think it works better to use a standard wiki table to present tournament and match results near the end of the article. An example of this that I like is Alexander Alekhine#Summary of results in competitions. The regular table format allows inclusion of a lot more information and in a format that is easier to understand. Placing a potentially large table near the end of an article is much better than putting it at the top and before the article body.
- I am strongly opposed to use of any medals infobox in chess biographies, and I think they should be removed. Quale (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to agree. Chess in general doesn't put a lot of emphasis on "medals". I don't really care if someone got a "bronze medal" at the Vietnamese Team Championship. They can be mentioned in the article, but shouldn't be in the infobox. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- Should we add this as a guideline to the WikiProject front page?
- We probably also need to add a cleanup project since there are a lot of players to be dealt with. Imcdc Contact 01:02, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm inclined to agree. Chess in general doesn't put a lot of emphasis on "medals". I don't really care if someone got a "bronze medal" at the Vietnamese Team Championship. They can be mentioned in the article, but shouldn't be in the infobox. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Bruce leverett Any thoughts on this? Imcdc Contact 01:04, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Also, the presence of chess Olympiad medal templates is not unique to Indian chess players. For example, see Vasyl Ivanchuk and Ruslan Ponomariov. Vajrayudhan (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Live rating being added by unregistered users despite being against guidelines
I have observed that live ratings are being constantly added to pages such as List of chess players by peak FIDE rating as well as player pages such as Arjun Erigaisi and Gukesh Dommaraju despite being against WikiProject Chess guidelines. Markdown flags such as "DO NOT ADD LIVE RATING" have been placed on such pages to no avail.
I wonder if the issue can be tackled by adding semi-protection or pending changes protection (See Misplaced Pages:Protection_policy#Comparison_table). At least the List of chess players by peak FIDE rating page, a target of frequent vandalism by unregistered users, is worthy of it. Vajrayudhan (talk) 01:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Fischer random chess#Requested move 29 October 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fischer random chess#Requested move 29 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:27, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
FICS at AfD
Of possible interest to this WikiProject: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Free Internet Chess Server (2nd nomination) — Rhododendrites \\ 00:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
PGN in articles on games
For some reason someone added the PGN to the article Game of the Century (chess). I don't really see any value in it, and I don't want this to become standard for articles about famous games. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 11:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Since we are already linking to the chessgames.com version in the External Links section, the raw PGN doesn't add any value. Bruce leverett (talk) 18:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for World Chess Championship 1972
World Chess Championship 1972 has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: