Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chess/Index of chess articles

This alphabetical index of Wikipedia articles falls within the scope of the WikiProject Indexes. This is a collaborative effort to create, maintain, and improve alphabetical indexes on Wikipedia.IndexesWikipedia:WikiProject IndexesTemplate:WikiProject IndexesIndexes articles

Chess

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles

Notice: The index also serves as (a lengthy) shared watchlist — by clicking "related changes" on the left while viewing the index, you can watch chess-related changes.

initial list

Initial list based on articles linking to chess. Update as needed. Moved from main page. Bubba73 (talk), 00:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go

Does Go (board game) really belong here? I don't see how go is a chess topic any more than checkers or Stratego or tic-tac-toe is a chess topic. Krakatoa 23:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. I see that Checkers is also listed. That seems weird to me, too. Krakatoa 23:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've found that some articles just mention chess once. Something like "bridge is the chess of card games" (fabricated example). Bubba73 (talk), 02:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seperate out biographies?

Do you think it would be good to seperate the list into biographies and other articles? The bio section would consist of only biographies, A-Z by last name, the other section would have all other articles, A-Z. Just a thought. Bubba73 (talk), 15:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like the idea. Did it. --ZeroOne (talk | @) 22:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that, I know it was a lot of work. I also wondered about seperating out the articles on openings, but now it seems to be pretty balanced between bio and non-bio. You did a good job. Bubba73 (talk), 23:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Separated the opening articles now. --ZeroOne (talk | @) 16:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work!! Bubba73 (talk), 00:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

use actual article name, not a redirect

For items on this list, please be sure to use the name of the actual article and not one that redirects to it. The reason is so it will show up under "related changes". Bubba73 (talk), 18:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bio tag

It would be good if we put a line like this one at the top of the discussion page

Put in yes/no for "living". I've done it for a few, but there must be many without such a tag. Bubba73 (talk), 02:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if that was the best template

But I do think this list is poorly organized. A simple alphabetical list works for content that is about a single subject, but this is about multiple subjects only related by one topic. I think it might be more helpful to organize it by subtopic. FrozenPurpleCube 17:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not too long ago I suggested that the list be divided in biographies and non-biographies. Openings could also be seperated out. Also see Category:Chess. Bubba73 (talk), 17:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a start. I also suggest a section on organizations and competitive play. FrozenPurpleCube 17:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chess and its categories

Hi, I was wondering if it would be possible to have a bot similar to User:Mathbot to automatically create the list of all chess topics. (that is all articles in the category chess and its subcategories).

Ok, I have added manually all the chess articles from the categories, all except chess people (players and others). Voorlandt 17:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have now manually added all the articles from the chess categories. These total 1774. However, as it stands the list now has 26 articles more. These are articles in the list, but that are not in any chess related category. If you have time, could you please put them in an appropriate chess category or remove them from the list?

Voorlandt 20:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty to strike out some items from your list:

The fairy chess pieces do have a category, Category:Fairy chess pieces, but I just tagged all of them as possible copyright infringements so unless someone writes them again from scratch, they will probably be deleted.

I don't know whether checkerboard should be included in this project at all since we have the chessboard article anyway.

Articles such as game complexity, game theory and game tree are related to chess but clearly aren't entirely about chess. Strategy game is also a top-class into which chess belongs to, not the other way around. Clearly chess is a strategy game but the article doesn't have much content about chess. I don't know what to do with these — what importance rating to give to them and whether they should be added into any chess related category.

Fischer Random Chess is a redirect to Chess960 which does have a category. Same goes for Greatest chess player of all time (Comparing top chess players throughout history), Xboard Communication Protocol (Chess Engine Communication Protocol) and Wang Hao (chess) (Wang Hao (chess player)).

Ealing Chess Club has been deleted. --ZeroOne (talk | @) 21:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed 7 articles:game complexity, game theory and game tree and 4 more. They are so general and really shouldn't be in the list. Apart from the fairy chess pieces which are soon to be deleted, this list is now 100% identical with the list of all pages in chess categories.Voorlandt 19:33, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How maintained?

How is this list maintained? I mean is it automatic or is it manual? If it's manual how do you know when new chess related articles get added? One example, now long ago the Cornstalk Defense was renamed the Corn Stalk Defense and impressively this article has it the new way. Is there some tools to help with tracking topics perhaps? ChessCreator (talk) 11:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of people maintain this list manually, when they create, move or remove an article. To make sure no article escapes, I use the list comparer of WP:AutoWikiBrowser on a random basis (I try weekly, sometimes more often, sometimes less). I use it make sure all articles in:

the category chess (recursively)
in this list
with the wikiproject chess template

are the same. Although you need permission to run the edit bot of AWP, everyone can use the listcomparer it comes with. Voorlandt (talk) 12:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Magical objects in Harry Potter

I disagree with the removal of 'Magical objects in Harry Potter'. 'Wizard chess' is one of the things getting teenagers interested in chess at the moment. While the current section says little about chess, it's got a better case to create a seperate 'Wizard Chess' article covering this from Jeremy Silman then removing the existing one in my opinion. ChessCreator (talk) 17:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that just because chess is mentioned in a list of tons of other objects is not enough to consider this article as chess-related. If there were a full article about this game, that would of course be different. SyG (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I agree. A separate page would be the solution, I suggested to move the 'Wizard's Chess' subject out onto it's own page see Talk:Magical_objects_in_Harry_Potter, but that was declined. So that leaves a requirement to expand the existing section when it then would be a chess topic. ChessCreator (talk) 23:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

Could redirects be added to this page? It might be a bit unencyclopedic but it would help to notice if they change on the watchlist. They are not immune to vandalism and recently had to save Sicilian Defense redirect from an deletion. ChessCreator (talk) 10:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would highly prefer not to, since this list greatly helps in keeping up to date the articles with the WP:Chess template (should be only on article pages, not on redirects). If this list also contains redirects, there is no easy way to check that all chess articles have the template (I use WP:AWB on a regular basis to make sure all the articles on this list are in a one-to-one correspondence with those having the template). Perhaps a different page can be created with all redirects? This page could be a subpage of some talkpage, so not an article. Voorlandt (talk) 12:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That rules out directly adding it to this article then. Does adding 'redirects' as a subpage of a talkpage mean it gets on the watchlist? I hope so but didn't think it works like that.

This talk page would be the idea place to put the redirects if that method does work. ChessCreator (talk) 12:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the related changes of this talk page [1], it includes the changes done to the redirect Sicilian Defense, so probably a subpage would work as well. Voorlandt (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one is going to check separate pages. The shared watchlist is this and edits on redirect 'Sicilian Defense' doesn't show on that. :( Pity, because would be neat solution if it did. ChessCreator (talk) 14:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I was trying to show with this example, is that if we can create an arbitrary page with links to all redirects, the related changes will show the changes. (as an example I used this talk page, which has a link to the redir Sicilian Defense, which was recently changed and hence shows up on the redir). Thus a subpage with all links would work. Voorlandt (talk) 19:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If we can make this work, I think it would be good. We actually should watch our category pages as well. It isn't common, but every so often someone will monkey with them. We also need to watch our cats because the WP:CFD category for discussion process can make rather sudden and drastic renames or deletions of categories, often with little warning unless someone spots it in time. I wonder if Talk pages for categories and redirects should be put in the Chess Wikiproject like we do for other chess pages. It would be good to know how other projects handle this. Quale (talk) 19:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sicilian Defense redirect situation was interesting, but it would never have been deleted. The deletion request was clearly in error and no admin would have deleted it. Also, an FYI: there are a number of templates used to explain the purpose of a redirect and to automatically put it in the appropriate categories. In addition to maintenance purposes, these can also help choose which redirect pages appear in printed or CD-ROM or DVD copies of the encyclopedia. In particular they help with redirects from alternative spellings and names, and page titles with and without diacritics (especially useful for human names). See WP:TMR for a list. Quale (talk) 13:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No danger of deletion of Sicilian Defense redirect for sure, but in danger of looking poor for every passing user that should happen to want to use it. Thanks for the info on the redirect templates still more to learn on that. ChessCreator (talk) 14:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right—it did look awful. Thanks for noticing it and taking care of it. Quale (talk) 14:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet Chess School / Soviet Chess Championship

Strange, no entries for either of these although when the USSR still existed it's championship was the strongest in the world and the Soviet Chess School produced a large number of World Champions. I am looking in the wrong place? If not I may create these pages in the future. SmokeyTheCat •TALK• 14:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have USSR Chess Championship; I don't think we have a USSR Chess School article though. --Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page moved

Since the page was in violation of multiple policies, including WP:SELFREF and WP:INTDABLINK, I have implemented the solution of moving this page to project space, as an alternative to outright deletion of the page. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]