- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. If someone wants to add some content about Chessbrah to Hansen's article, then a redirect could be made. Currently there's a reference to "Chessbrahs" being a username that Hansen uses, but nothing else. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Chessbrah ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It looks like all of the sources are primary and/or brief mentions of the subject, and I'm not seeing sufficient other sourcing out there to satisfy WP:GNG. We would need in-depth coverage of "chessbrahs" beyond coverage of Hansen and other involved individuals, and in publications not connected to the people involved (either financially or personally). Hansen himself is notable, however, and this is so closely associated with him that a redirect may make sense. (a merge only if reliable secondary sources are used, as including material based just on primary sources would be undue/promo). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: lack of participation
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 03:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisting comment: lack of participation
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 03:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. The chessbrah article actually does cite a number of significant secondary sources, including recognition by the United States Chess Federation, the Canadian Chess Federation, and other independent sources. Among the most compelling is from La Presse, an independent news organization in Montreal, Canada, which produced a feature documentary of the chessbrahs, filming both GM Eric Hansen and IM Aman Hambleton, and others in primary source interviews as well as observing the chessbrahs in their natural habitat for the purpose of the feature piece; thus the entire feature may be considered a secondary source because of the news organization's full editorial control (i.e., this was not Chessbrah self-promotion; see reference 5: Grand Master 2.0,
[1]). Documentaries are considered as secondary sources. Furthermore, the US Chess Federation (USCF) recognized "chessbrahs" in the bio of GM Hansen as one of the official commentators for the 2017 US Chess Championship, specifically recognizing that chessbrah is associated with not only GM Hansen, but others, as well (see reference 22: U.S. CHESS CHAMPS: MEET THE COMMENTATORS & ARBITERS:
[2]. There are also several compelling secondary sources that reliably and notably cover not only the existence of The Montreal Chessbrahs chess team in the PRO CHESS LEAGUE, but cover their performance, including against World Champion Magnus Carlsen. The team's PRO CHESS LEAGUE roster includes a notable roster of world class chess players, including GM Fabiano Caruana and GM Anish Giri. See references 47 and 48 re: "The Montreal Chessbrahs" in the Pro Chess League. An additional secondary reference is from the Chess Federation of Canada here:
[3]. The Chessbrah article must not be merged into Eric Hansen (Chess Player) because there are multiple chessbrahs (PLURAL), as stated in the article and supported by citations. GM Hansen is the founder of the name, yes, but Chessbrah is also a brand entity and a social movement within the chess community, as detailed in the article, and the chess community has social import to society at large, and the Current World Chess Champion, Magnus Carlsen, has been recently photographed with 2 chessbrahs, GMs Yasser Seirawan and Eric Hansen (see:
[4]). In short, the chessbrah name is a recognized, reputable name in the chess community, it's been adopted into the name of a PRO CHESS LEAGUE team that competes at one of the highest levels of chess, and it's one of the most popular chess-related Twitch and YouTube channels, and it comprises several high-level titled chess players. The name Chessbrah definitely should not be associated with Eric Hansen alone as that would not be an accurate depiction of who the chessbrahs are and what they represent. It serves the public to inform who the chessbrahs are in the form of this Wikipedia article. It's why I wrote it in the first place. I respectfully urge Rhododendrites to keep the article. Piewalker 21:52, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- To be clear, I am not arguing that Hansen is not himself notable. He is. And I'm not opposed to mentioning "chessbrah" in that article. "Chessbrah" is not notable, though, and these sources just demonstrate that. They are brief mentions, use of the word, coverage of Hansen or individual notable people, etc. -- what we need is in-depth coverage of this subject as distinct from that of the involved people, published by secondary sources with a reputation for reliability, editorial oversight, fact-checking, etc. The
first link, which is clearly the best quality source, displays the word Chessbrah, but seems to be about Hansen and not the concept/company "chessbrah".
This has no in-depth coverage at all -- just a brief mention in a paragraph about Hansen. That it's used in a team's
name would only help if there were in-depth coverage of the meaning of the name published in a different source (i.e. the members of the team may be notable, and the team may even be notable -- I haven't really looked -- but this article isn't about that team, but a company and/or lifestyle brand/identity. The standard would be
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH. —
Rhododendrites
talk \\
02:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- I appreciate that, Ryan. What would be ideal to allow the article to survive? An independent news story discussing Chessbrah as its focus? A news story featuring World Champion Magnus Carlsen discussing the Chessbrahs? A feature in Chess Life Magazine? Perhaps a feature like this one on GMs Hansen and Van Kampen by SportsNet Canada: [5]? Or a completely new Wiki article describing the Pro Chess League Team "The Montreal Chessbrahs" with some of this article as background? What would you like to see happen?
- To be clear, I am not arguing that Hansen is not himself notable. He is. And I'm not opposed to mentioning "chessbrah" in that article. "Chessbrah" is not notable, though, and these sources just demonstrate that. They are brief mentions, use of the word, coverage of Hansen or individual notable people, etc. -- what we need is in-depth coverage of this subject as distinct from that of the involved people, published by secondary sources with a reputation for reliability, editorial oversight, fact-checking, etc. The
first link, which is clearly the best quality source, displays the word Chessbrah, but seems to be about Hansen and not the concept/company "chessbrah".
This has no in-depth coverage at all -- just a brief mention in a paragraph about Hansen. That it's used in a team's
name would only help if there were in-depth coverage of the meaning of the name published in a different source (i.e. the members of the team may be notable, and the team may even be notable -- I haven't really looked -- but this article isn't about that team, but a company and/or lifestyle brand/identity. The standard would be
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH. —
Rhododendrites
talk \\
02:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. To quote
WP:SPIP, "The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it—without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter." None of the quoted sources meet this standard. Neither "recognition" nor "reputation" nor "social import" nor who Carlsen was photographed with matters; what matters is whether people not associated with or trying to promote "Chessbrah" have written anything non-trivial about it. There is no sign that they have. Therefore the article should be deleted.
Cobblet (
talk)
03:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Cobblet, with respect it appears you didn't watch the 7-min documentary feature by La Presse. Your comment is wholly dismissive and unfairly so. It's certainly a non-trivial secondary source. I encourage you and other comers to watch it and seriously consider it.
[6]. Also, something doesn't have to be "written" in print to be valid. Other independent sources of media count (video, radio, independent blogs, etc.) The medium is also the message. Piewalker 20:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- A 15-second soundbite (4:23 to 4:38 in the video) is non-trivial? I don't think so. Recall that WP:GNG refers to "sources", meaning that "multiple sources are generally expected." If this was genuinely a topic of any "social import" one would surely not have to reach so hard to find even a single significant source. Cobblet ( talk) 23:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Cobblet, with respect it appears you didn't watch the 7-min documentary feature by La Presse. Your comment is wholly dismissive and unfairly so. It's certainly a non-trivial secondary source. I encourage you and other comers to watch it and seriously consider it.
[6]. Also, something doesn't have to be "written" in print to be valid. Other independent sources of media count (video, radio, independent blogs, etc.) The medium is also the message. Piewalker 20:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect to Eric Hansen (chess player). Utter lack of non-trivial mentions in secondary sources - most of the references are just links to YouTube. Not notable enough for a standalone article.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 14:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per user Cobblet. Sophia91 ( talk) 15:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. If someone wants to add some content about Chessbrah to Hansen's article, then a redirect could be made. Currently there's a reference to "Chessbrahs" being a username that Hansen uses, but nothing else. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 16:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Chessbrah ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It looks like all of the sources are primary and/or brief mentions of the subject, and I'm not seeing sufficient other sourcing out there to satisfy WP:GNG. We would need in-depth coverage of "chessbrahs" beyond coverage of Hansen and other involved individuals, and in publications not connected to the people involved (either financially or personally). Hansen himself is notable, however, and this is so closely associated with him that a redirect may make sense. (a merge only if reliable secondary sources are used, as including material based just on primary sources would be undue/promo). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: lack of participation
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 03:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisting comment: lack of participation
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 03:06, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. The chessbrah article actually does cite a number of significant secondary sources, including recognition by the United States Chess Federation, the Canadian Chess Federation, and other independent sources. Among the most compelling is from La Presse, an independent news organization in Montreal, Canada, which produced a feature documentary of the chessbrahs, filming both GM Eric Hansen and IM Aman Hambleton, and others in primary source interviews as well as observing the chessbrahs in their natural habitat for the purpose of the feature piece; thus the entire feature may be considered a secondary source because of the news organization's full editorial control (i.e., this was not Chessbrah self-promotion; see reference 5: Grand Master 2.0,
[1]). Documentaries are considered as secondary sources. Furthermore, the US Chess Federation (USCF) recognized "chessbrahs" in the bio of GM Hansen as one of the official commentators for the 2017 US Chess Championship, specifically recognizing that chessbrah is associated with not only GM Hansen, but others, as well (see reference 22: U.S. CHESS CHAMPS: MEET THE COMMENTATORS & ARBITERS:
[2]. There are also several compelling secondary sources that reliably and notably cover not only the existence of The Montreal Chessbrahs chess team in the PRO CHESS LEAGUE, but cover their performance, including against World Champion Magnus Carlsen. The team's PRO CHESS LEAGUE roster includes a notable roster of world class chess players, including GM Fabiano Caruana and GM Anish Giri. See references 47 and 48 re: "The Montreal Chessbrahs" in the Pro Chess League. An additional secondary reference is from the Chess Federation of Canada here:
[3]. The Chessbrah article must not be merged into Eric Hansen (Chess Player) because there are multiple chessbrahs (PLURAL), as stated in the article and supported by citations. GM Hansen is the founder of the name, yes, but Chessbrah is also a brand entity and a social movement within the chess community, as detailed in the article, and the chess community has social import to society at large, and the Current World Chess Champion, Magnus Carlsen, has been recently photographed with 2 chessbrahs, GMs Yasser Seirawan and Eric Hansen (see:
[4]). In short, the chessbrah name is a recognized, reputable name in the chess community, it's been adopted into the name of a PRO CHESS LEAGUE team that competes at one of the highest levels of chess, and it's one of the most popular chess-related Twitch and YouTube channels, and it comprises several high-level titled chess players. The name Chessbrah definitely should not be associated with Eric Hansen alone as that would not be an accurate depiction of who the chessbrahs are and what they represent. It serves the public to inform who the chessbrahs are in the form of this Wikipedia article. It's why I wrote it in the first place. I respectfully urge Rhododendrites to keep the article. Piewalker 21:52, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- To be clear, I am not arguing that Hansen is not himself notable. He is. And I'm not opposed to mentioning "chessbrah" in that article. "Chessbrah" is not notable, though, and these sources just demonstrate that. They are brief mentions, use of the word, coverage of Hansen or individual notable people, etc. -- what we need is in-depth coverage of this subject as distinct from that of the involved people, published by secondary sources with a reputation for reliability, editorial oversight, fact-checking, etc. The
first link, which is clearly the best quality source, displays the word Chessbrah, but seems to be about Hansen and not the concept/company "chessbrah".
This has no in-depth coverage at all -- just a brief mention in a paragraph about Hansen. That it's used in a team's
name would only help if there were in-depth coverage of the meaning of the name published in a different source (i.e. the members of the team may be notable, and the team may even be notable -- I haven't really looked -- but this article isn't about that team, but a company and/or lifestyle brand/identity. The standard would be
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH. —
Rhododendrites
talk \\
02:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- I appreciate that, Ryan. What would be ideal to allow the article to survive? An independent news story discussing Chessbrah as its focus? A news story featuring World Champion Magnus Carlsen discussing the Chessbrahs? A feature in Chess Life Magazine? Perhaps a feature like this one on GMs Hansen and Van Kampen by SportsNet Canada: [5]? Or a completely new Wiki article describing the Pro Chess League Team "The Montreal Chessbrahs" with some of this article as background? What would you like to see happen?
- To be clear, I am not arguing that Hansen is not himself notable. He is. And I'm not opposed to mentioning "chessbrah" in that article. "Chessbrah" is not notable, though, and these sources just demonstrate that. They are brief mentions, use of the word, coverage of Hansen or individual notable people, etc. -- what we need is in-depth coverage of this subject as distinct from that of the involved people, published by secondary sources with a reputation for reliability, editorial oversight, fact-checking, etc. The
first link, which is clearly the best quality source, displays the word Chessbrah, but seems to be about Hansen and not the concept/company "chessbrah".
This has no in-depth coverage at all -- just a brief mention in a paragraph about Hansen. That it's used in a team's
name would only help if there were in-depth coverage of the meaning of the name published in a different source (i.e. the members of the team may be notable, and the team may even be notable -- I haven't really looked -- but this article isn't about that team, but a company and/or lifestyle brand/identity. The standard would be
WP:GNG or
WP:CORPDEPTH. —
Rhododendrites
talk \\
02:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. To quote
WP:SPIP, "The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it—without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter." None of the quoted sources meet this standard. Neither "recognition" nor "reputation" nor "social import" nor who Carlsen was photographed with matters; what matters is whether people not associated with or trying to promote "Chessbrah" have written anything non-trivial about it. There is no sign that they have. Therefore the article should be deleted.
Cobblet (
talk)
03:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Cobblet, with respect it appears you didn't watch the 7-min documentary feature by La Presse. Your comment is wholly dismissive and unfairly so. It's certainly a non-trivial secondary source. I encourage you and other comers to watch it and seriously consider it.
[6]. Also, something doesn't have to be "written" in print to be valid. Other independent sources of media count (video, radio, independent blogs, etc.) The medium is also the message. Piewalker 20:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- A 15-second soundbite (4:23 to 4:38 in the video) is non-trivial? I don't think so. Recall that WP:GNG refers to "sources", meaning that "multiple sources are generally expected." If this was genuinely a topic of any "social import" one would surely not have to reach so hard to find even a single significant source. Cobblet ( talk) 23:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Cobblet, with respect it appears you didn't watch the 7-min documentary feature by La Presse. Your comment is wholly dismissive and unfairly so. It's certainly a non-trivial secondary source. I encourage you and other comers to watch it and seriously consider it.
[6]. Also, something doesn't have to be "written" in print to be valid. Other independent sources of media count (video, radio, independent blogs, etc.) The medium is also the message. Piewalker 20:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect to Eric Hansen (chess player). Utter lack of non-trivial mentions in secondary sources - most of the references are just links to YouTube. Not notable enough for a standalone article.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 14:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per user Cobblet. Sophia91 ( talk) 15:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.