Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Alexander Alekhine/1

Alexander Alekhine

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses some unreliable sources, like old geocities websites and an angelfire website. These should be removed, and the information sourced to them should be cited to other sources or removed. To help with this task, there are a lot of sources listed in the "Further reading" section that can be used instead. The large amount of sources listed in Further reading also makes me think that this article might not be complete. If some of these sources are not usable in the article, I think they should be removed. There is some uncited prose in the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is the above a complete list of problems you have encountered? I would like something that I (or someone else) could use as a checklist. Bruce leverett (talk) 18:18, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bruce leverett: This is a complete list for now. I'm happy to take another look when the above are completed. Other editors are welcome to also post concerns, and after a re-review I might find other concerns. Feel free to ping me if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 18:26, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's unreasonable for me to ask you to do a little more work here. Before I commit hours to this effort, I want to know if there's light at the end of the tunnel. It is not realistic to kick off a GAR without some idea of how much effort it will involve. Bruce leverett (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bruce leverett: The GA criteria is at WP:GA?. Any editor can review and determine what needs to be done so that the article meets the criteria. Wikipedia is a volunteer service and doing a deep review takes me several hours, which is time that I do not have. I am happy to re-review this article once editors finish making improvements and determine that it meets the GA criteria: pinging me here is the best way to ask me to re-review. Any questions about the criteria can be posted at WT:GA. Any questions about the article can be posted below. Z1720 (talk) 13:18, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the article was not based on any of the serious biographies, such as the ones by Linder and Linder, by Moran, or by Kotov, but on various tertiary sources, including some that are self-published, such as Bill Wall's pages (the geocities links), and "chess vignettes" (the angelfire link). To restore it to goodness, it would be necessary to acquire one or more of those serious biographies, and check the whole article against it, as I did with Paul Morphy, and as another editor did with Vera Menchik. I am interested in this, but I am not sure when, or if, I will ever do it.

Bill Wall's pages have been widely used in chess-related Wikipedia articles, in spite of being self-published, because they have been convenient to use. However they have also been peripatetic. The last location where one could find them was at http://billwall.phpwebhosting.com, but they are gone from there. On chess.com Wall announced (very recently) that one could look for him at https://sites.google.com/view/billwallchessarchive/, and there is a fine website of his there, but it does not link to any of his history articles. Bruce leverett (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.