Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Tata Steel Chess Tournament/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:26, 31 March 2025 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Tata Steel Chess Tournament

[edit]

Tata Steel Chess Tournament (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): DWF91 (talk) 21:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Normal people have to see Naples before they die…, but a chess grandmaster has to win the Wijk aan Zee tournament first of all."

Back, but with a different topic this time. The Tata Steel, or the Wijk aan Zee tournament, is most likely the strongest chess tournament outside of the World Championship cycle. This list features the winners and their scores, with deatails of the tournament history, and it's place in the chess world. DWF91 (talk) 21:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History6042

[edit]
  • TataSteelChess2025.jpg needs alt text.
  • "The format and number of games is decided by the number of tied players" needs both a citation and a period.
    • it's cited by the ref at the end of the sentence- I didn't add it in the note, bcs it already shows
  • "No competition (due to World War II)" is unsourced in the table.
  • Neither of the given sources (2 and 3) support "Corus Group was taken over by the Tata Group and became Tata Steel Europe in 2007, with the tournament changing its name in 2011 to its current name."
    • Added ref for the takeover
  • "Single-elimination tournament" -> "single-elimination tournament"
  • This is a good list and that is all I could find, so I will be happy to support this list once these are fixed. History6042😊 (Contact me) 02:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sgubaldo

[edit]

Definitely want to look at this. Putting myself down but won't have too much time until the weekend. Ping if I haven't said anything by Sunday. Sgubaldo (talk) 00:15, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sgubaldo pinging you, assuming by Sunday you meant the start or mid of it instead of the end. DWF91 (talk) 11:29, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry for not getting to this earlier. Will do today. Sgubaldo (talk) 11:38, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Umm? DWF91 (talk) 19:08, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...the Hoogovens Tournament from its creation in 1938 until the sponsor Koninklijke Hoogovens merged with British Steel to form the Corus Group in 1999, after which the tournament was called the Corus Chess Tournament." ==> "...the Hoogovens Tournament from its creation in 1938 until sponsor Koninklijke Hoogovens merged with British Steel to form the Corus Group in 1999, after which the tournament was renamed the Corus Chess Tournament."
  • "... in 2007, with the tournament changing its name in 2011 to its current name." ==> "... in 2007, with the tournament changing to its current name in 2011."
  • "... tournament, but regular club players are welcome to play as well in the lower groups." ==> remove 'as well'?
  • "The Masters group pits fourteen of the world's best against..." ==> maybe 'best players'?
  • "Magnus Carlsen holds the record for most wins at the tournament, with eight titles to his name. Viswanathan Anand is the only other player to have won the event five or more times, with five wins." ==> "Magnus Carlsen holds the record for most wins at the tournament, with eight. Viswanathan Anand is the only other player to have won the event five or more times, with five titles to his name." to avoid having 'won/wins' very close to each other?
  • Wikilink time control in the lead?
  • "As the tournament grew in stature, the tournament began to offer lower groups..." ==> "As the tournament grew in stature, it began..."
  • "From 2011, the formal name changed to the 'Tata Steel Chess Tournament'" ==> This section uses ' but the subsection above uses " for Corus Chess Tournament. Make it consistent.
  • Wikilink the first instance of World War II in the Hoogovens Beverwijk subsection.
  • "In 1954 the tournament field was returned to ten players" ==> comma after 1954
  • In the Hoogovens Wijk aan Zee subsection, does "The winners of the top group were:" need to be on its own paragraph?
    • I wanted to show that the constant at 14 part is an observation and not directly sourced by the ref. I have made it one paragraph now.
  • Change "Winners of the top group:" in the Hoogovens Beverwijk section to "The winners of the top group were:" like in the other ones

Sorry for the delay. Sgubaldo (talk) 20:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done all, Sgubaldo. DWF91 (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Sgubaldo (talk) 16:04, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TheDoctorWho

[edit]
  • Consider using an Infobox on the article like {{Infobox recurring event}}
    • I will try to look for a different one, as this one does not seem good enough- though I'm not sure if an inbox is necessary
  • "there has been a long list of famous winners" - "famous" feels like WP:PUFFERY
    • changed to "very strong"; also, I won't call it puffery when the article only names world champions in the sentence
  • {{Quote box}} should be replaced with {{Blockquote}} per MOS:BQ
    • Not long enough to make a BQ necessary per MOS:BQ
  • The tables sort the winners by their given name. I don't know that there's actually a guideline on this, so I suppose it's merely a suggestion, but it seems like more often than not a table like this would sort by surname instead using {{sortname}}
  • Done
  • Why are the country names in the tables using {{abbrv}}? They're not abbreviations.
    • I have made the countries a different column now
  • I'd suggest picking a better image of Polgár, perhaps one where we're not looking at the side of her face
    • They are images from the tournament- there weren't actual good pics on commons from when it was called corus, so I chose Polgar bcs she almost won in 2003, and there is no pic of a women

I think that's it for me! TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done or replied, TheDoctorWho. DWF91 (talk) 19:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about c:File:Humpy Koneru.jpg or c:File:Humpy Koneru.jpg? Not of Polgár, but both from Corus in 2006. TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
She never played in the top group. It's either the present image or File:Vladimir Kramnik 2005.jpg or File:Wijk aan Zee 2008 Veselin Topalov.jpg. DWF91 (talk) 06:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I meant to link to c:File:Kateryna Lahno.jpg as the "or" above. Regardless, because Polgár isn't mentioned in any of the tables, I don't think that using a non-top group member is an issue. Lahno and Koneru are perfect options if you insist on having a woman. TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:00, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather have a different top-group player even if not a woman, rather than someone not in the top-group. Which image looks better- Kramnik or Topalov? DWF91 (talk) 07:05, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kramnik would be my pick. TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done, image changed now. DWF91 (talk) 07:14, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to support nice work! TheDoctorWho (talk) 07:20, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On a second thought, I have changed the image back to Judit; even with the fact that we only see the side of her face, having her on the article feels more important. Just informing, in case that undoing it might seem dishonest, TheDoctorWho. DWF91 (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do want to start out by thanking you for the additional ping for transparency. I'm going to be honest, I do expect to be in the extreme minority here, but I am going to unfortunately oppose for failing WP:FLCR criteria 5(B). This section deals with following the appropriate manual of style, and the subsection specifically for images. MOS:IMAGEREL says "Images should look like what they are meant to illustrate, regardless of whether they are authentic. For example, a painting of a cupcake may be an acceptable image for Cupcake, but a real cupcake that has been decorated to look like something else entirely is less appropriate." I assume the ultimate goal here with the image in the first place (based on the discussion above) is to illustrate a chess player at Corus. However, in the image you can't even tell that Polgár is playing chess. How do I know she's not sitting in an airport or office building? Polgár is not mentioned anywhere in the article which also leads to confusion on its relevance. Plenty of alternatives have been provided, of both men and women, and of some in the top group, which do provide the wider relevance needed for inclusion. Despite them also not being mentioned, the fact you can tell they're playing chess make them better candidates for inclusion. TheDoctorWho (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changed the images again; I have made a very weird compromise between what images I want and what is available, so I hope this fixes 5b. (Update- I hope I didn't go overboard with the descriptions)DWF91 (talk) 19:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I am now satisfied with the images, I don't know that I feel comfortable striking my oppose quite yet. Per WP:FLCR #6 this time. Nearly every change I've suggested to improve this article has been reverted by one editor or another. It took multiple days to get the images straightened out, but now the tables have been reverted back to what they were when I initially left my review. TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the straightening out the images was me, tbh- the one revert barely paid a part. I have restored my version, and pinged the reverting editor. It should be stable now- though you can support in a few days, if you want to ensure that the editor wouldn't just change it again quickly. 07:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC) DWF91 (talk) 07:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support given this has seem to stabalized TheDoctorWho (talk) 06:32, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IntentinallyDense

[edit]
Source review
  • Sources look to be appropriately reliable for the topic
  • Formatting is consistent across refs
  • My spotchecks all came back clean. I checked the two most used sources as well as some random ones.

Pass for the source review. IntentionallyDense (Contribs) 18:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dajasj

[edit]

Maybe I am missing something, but it unclear to me why there is a caption in the text ("The winners of the top group were:") with a reference, and a separate caption which is hidden only for screenreaders. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a visible caption "Winners 1968-1999", which should include the reference? If I look at {{Screen reader-only}}, it mentions a section heading as the most important reason to use the template, but that doesn't apply here. Dajasj (talk) 13:56, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The section headings would kind of be the same as the captions; which would also be similar to the prose under the heading- for example, it would be "corus" heading, changed to corus in 2000, and winners 2000-(which is redundant and to my eyes atleast does not look good). The "the winners of the top group" isn't a caption, it's just part of the prose. And you didn't raise it, so you probably read why it's used, that screen reader only caption is bcs it allows those who use screen readers to jump straight to tables while understanding them. DWF91 (talk) 16:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point. But the section headers are useful for technical reasons (both screenreaders and users of the browser can easily move to it). So that is why it makes sense to duplicate them and hide the caption for screenreaders. But there is no technical reason (correct me if I'm wrong) to keep the prose-caption and not make it part of the table caption. Aside from the technical reasons, it also makes it easier for non-screenreader users to glance what the table is about. And it also makes it clearer that the reference at the end of the prose caption is in fact the reference of the entire table. And the reason I only changed the first table is that the prose caption isn't even part of the paragraph (although the rest of the reasoning apply to the other tables as well). Dajasj (talk) 06:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does not look good, is all I can say. This should probably be on the talk page, instead of here, btw. The prose isn't a caption, it's just a different paragraph, the table would look worse with a caption with only a sentence between headings and table for three of the subsections. DWF91 (talk) 09:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I came across it because I was checking articles that needed review, so thought this was a fitting place. Anyway, if no one objects to the lack of visible caption, I won't make big point of it. Dajasj (talk) 10:11, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It might be, but it seemed like a minor point, so that's why I asked that the talk page might be better, wasn't trying to be rude or anything. DWF91 (talk) 10:17, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You weren't rude, I was just trying to explain why I placed it here. Cheers! Dajasj (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dajasj are there any other points you feel need to be looked at on the article before a Support? Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nope Dajasj (talk) 14:14, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Due to DWFan's retirement, they have requested I take over handling this nom. If there are any more comments or things needing to be reviewed, I will be handling those on their behalf. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:04, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted. --PresN 00:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Tata_Steel_Chess_Tournament/archive1&oldid=1283265296"