This article was nominated for deletion on 11 September 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
A news item involving World Chess Championship 2014 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 23 November 2014. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Next WCC is in 2013 see Regulations for 2013 WCC
Langholz8 ( talk) 19:55, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The citations for WCC 2014 are all referenced -- particularly the rating average of July 2011 and January 2012. There are no references to support the combination of rating lists in the WCC 2013 article. Shotcallerballerballer ( talk) 00:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
This page should not be speedily deleted because...it is correct, while the WCC 2013 article is not. -- Shotcallerballerballer ( talk) 00:47, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
The 2014 page is obsolete. It should be deleted. The cycle http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/regscandidates2012.pdf clearly states that the next wch will be in 2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddlj81 ( talk • contribs) 04:30, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I added that the winner or the World Chess Championship 2013 will be Vishy Anand or Magnus Carlsen. Someone removed it due to WP:BALL. This makes no sense. The 2013 world championship will be played between Magnus Carlsen and Vishy Anand, and it is not speculating to say that one of them will win the match and be the defending World Champion. I see no reason it should not be there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.139.8 ( talk) 18:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Seriously? In that case, why don't you delete the WCC 2013 article because there is no guarantee that either of them will not die in a plane crash? Or for that matter, delete the 2014 article because there is no guarantee that the world will not end? There are sources saying that the winner of the 2013 match will play in 2014, and that's what matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.139.8 ( talk) 19:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
By the way, if this is an April Fool, Wikipedia:Rules for Fools - "Vandalism in mainspace will still be treated as such." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.139.8 ( talk) 19:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Does anyone know source for opening in pairwise results? If there is any source I can update it, but I don't know sources Coderzombie ( talk) 13:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know what does "SB" column meant for in this table at official web-page of the tournament? Official Standings Page. Is it something we need to include in Wiki page as well? - 144.230.63.52 ( talk) 15:43, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
It's the Sonneborn-Berger Score. Steveg922 ( talk) 18:12, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
I wanted to show you what tool we use in the Hebrew wikipedia to show the games. [1]. You can also annotate the games using this tool, and the best is that the reader can sit down and see the game playing by itself like in the chess sites. You are invited to install the tool in the English wikipedia! -- Yoavd ( talk) 11:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
The timeline should be put in prose and then be moved between candidates and the actual match. Maybe someone tries something. - Koppapa ( talk) 17:18, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to ask for a consensus as to which set of moves reads better: Those for Game 3 vs. Game 4. Notice that in Game 3, several moves are split across two lines, making those two half-moves harder to read. In Game 4, there are no such breaks. Which is preferred? Once we have a consensus, we can make them all the same. Thanks. -- Art Smart Chart/ Heart 17:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Please note that the following 3RR Warning has been issued. I will thank 37.53.192.157 await a consensus before again violating the 3RR. At least please give others a chance to see the two versions. Also, I noticed that 37.53.192.157 has been editing only since today. I ask 37.53.192.157 to log in properly to avoid giving the appearance of sock-puppetry. Thanks. -- Art Smart Chart/ Heart 17:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
No consensus can be reached because 37.53.192.157's edit warring prevents other editors from seeing the version I have proposed. I have filed a 3RR complaint on the Administrators Noticeboard. 37.53.192.157 has reverted my edits 4 times, the last of which was after he duly received a 3RR warning. -- Art Smart Chart/ Heart 17:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
This may be the wrong page to raise this, but I see that since 2010, the players use the same colours in game six and game seven rather that alternating. What was the reason for the change and could an explanation be included either in this article or at World Chess Championship 2010? Tigerboy1966 19:48, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Someone added the speculation that game 9 was one of the shortest wcc games. I have compiled all the games from classical wcc matches that are 20 moves or less:
What I'm tring to convey here is that 34...h5??, bad though it was, was not the move that lost the game for Anand. The consensus among the commentators is that Black's position was lost anyway, so "possibly lost" is actually a rather conservative description. MaxBrowne ( talk) 00:17, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I suggest adding at least a sentence to the article explaining why there will be no 2015 World Chess Championship. I've Googled and Googled, and can't find an explanation. Thanks. Art Smart Chart/ Heart 16:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 11 September 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
A news item involving World Chess Championship 2014 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 23 November 2014. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Next WCC is in 2013 see Regulations for 2013 WCC
Langholz8 ( talk) 19:55, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The citations for WCC 2014 are all referenced -- particularly the rating average of July 2011 and January 2012. There are no references to support the combination of rating lists in the WCC 2013 article. Shotcallerballerballer ( talk) 00:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
This page should not be speedily deleted because...it is correct, while the WCC 2013 article is not. -- Shotcallerballerballer ( talk) 00:47, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
The 2014 page is obsolete. It should be deleted. The cycle http://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/regscandidates2012.pdf clearly states that the next wch will be in 2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddlj81 ( talk • contribs) 04:30, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
I added that the winner or the World Chess Championship 2013 will be Vishy Anand or Magnus Carlsen. Someone removed it due to WP:BALL. This makes no sense. The 2013 world championship will be played between Magnus Carlsen and Vishy Anand, and it is not speculating to say that one of them will win the match and be the defending World Champion. I see no reason it should not be there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.139.8 ( talk) 18:51, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Seriously? In that case, why don't you delete the WCC 2013 article because there is no guarantee that either of them will not die in a plane crash? Or for that matter, delete the 2014 article because there is no guarantee that the world will not end? There are sources saying that the winner of the 2013 match will play in 2014, and that's what matters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.139.8 ( talk) 19:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
By the way, if this is an April Fool, Wikipedia:Rules for Fools - "Vandalism in mainspace will still be treated as such." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.139.8 ( talk) 19:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Does anyone know source for opening in pairwise results? If there is any source I can update it, but I don't know sources Coderzombie ( talk) 13:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Does anyone know what does "SB" column meant for in this table at official web-page of the tournament? Official Standings Page. Is it something we need to include in Wiki page as well? - 144.230.63.52 ( talk) 15:43, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
It's the Sonneborn-Berger Score. Steveg922 ( talk) 18:12, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
I wanted to show you what tool we use in the Hebrew wikipedia to show the games. [1]. You can also annotate the games using this tool, and the best is that the reader can sit down and see the game playing by itself like in the chess sites. You are invited to install the tool in the English wikipedia! -- Yoavd ( talk) 11:02, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
The timeline should be put in prose and then be moved between candidates and the actual match. Maybe someone tries something. - Koppapa ( talk) 17:18, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to ask for a consensus as to which set of moves reads better: Those for Game 3 vs. Game 4. Notice that in Game 3, several moves are split across two lines, making those two half-moves harder to read. In Game 4, there are no such breaks. Which is preferred? Once we have a consensus, we can make them all the same. Thanks. -- Art Smart Chart/ Heart 17:04, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Please note that the following 3RR Warning has been issued. I will thank 37.53.192.157 await a consensus before again violating the 3RR. At least please give others a chance to see the two versions. Also, I noticed that 37.53.192.157 has been editing only since today. I ask 37.53.192.157 to log in properly to avoid giving the appearance of sock-puppetry. Thanks. -- Art Smart Chart/ Heart 17:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
No consensus can be reached because 37.53.192.157's edit warring prevents other editors from seeing the version I have proposed. I have filed a 3RR complaint on the Administrators Noticeboard. 37.53.192.157 has reverted my edits 4 times, the last of which was after he duly received a 3RR warning. -- Art Smart Chart/ Heart 17:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
This may be the wrong page to raise this, but I see that since 2010, the players use the same colours in game six and game seven rather that alternating. What was the reason for the change and could an explanation be included either in this article or at World Chess Championship 2010? Tigerboy1966 19:48, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
Someone added the speculation that game 9 was one of the shortest wcc games. I have compiled all the games from classical wcc matches that are 20 moves or less:
What I'm tring to convey here is that 34...h5??, bad though it was, was not the move that lost the game for Anand. The consensus among the commentators is that Black's position was lost anyway, so "possibly lost" is actually a rather conservative description. MaxBrowne ( talk) 00:17, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
I suggest adding at least a sentence to the article explaining why there will be no 2015 World Chess Championship. I've Googled and Googled, and can't find an explanation. Thanks. Art Smart Chart/ Heart 16:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)