User talk:Chesslover96
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Cornstalk defense
Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Cornstalk defense, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 21:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hello Chesslover96
 |
We would like to invite you to join WikiProject Chess, an attempt to build and maintain Chess-related articles on Wikipedia. To join, simply add your name to the Participants section of WikiProject Chess. |
ChessCreator (talk) 23:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Just to say thank you. You contributed a lot of info to various chess openings recently, it's much appreciated. ChessCreator (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Corn Stalk Defense
An editor has nominated Corn Stalk Defense, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corn Stalk Defense and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] re:Thank you
Hi Eric, I'm quite new also, although been spending to much time checking in recently.
- For the unorthodox opening what is required is two 'reliable sources', reliable sources so it seems are printed books. This creates a problem for me as I don't have any books on early openings. I have however searched the internet and found some pages of Eric Schiller's Unorthodox chess book. Also on wikipedia they have the idea about No Original Research, so ultimately for a good article every item should have a source, otherwise some one else can dispute if something is true and have unsourced information removed. By the way the same doesn't apply to wikibooks so far as I can tell so if you want to add your knowledge then Opening theory in chess is a place to add it.
- Sometimes you make edits and place a space or two at the front of the sentence, spaces at the beginning for some reason causes wikipedia to place it inside a dotted box, if you get this happen just remove the space or spaces from the beginning and the box disappears.
- to send a message to anyone, add an edit there talk page, like I'm doing here on your talk page. You can find a members talk page by clicking the word talk next to there name. ChessCreator (talk) 00:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 00:43, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Boungcloud Attack
Isn't this a bit pointless? I'm all for having 1st moves covered, but this one I find bizarre, so far as I can tell it has no significance and as the article says is about a specific community, something like an in joke. Such pages don't in my view help establish the other unusual first moves, because it can look like the other page are created as a joke where this Boungcloud Attack page can be used to highlight a point. ChessCreator (talk) 02:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- "Could you help me fix it?" - What is it that requires fixing? ChessCreator (talk) 16:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- It seems that the criteria for such things are 'Substantive coverage in reliable sources' or more clearly 'two reliable sources', when a 'reliable sources' would be from a publisher(book or online) or an expert website (like FIDE, ECO or ICCF official sites) with two sources it can be said to be notable. In this case I don't know of one reliable source, although I could be wrong. Without two reliable source I'd be in favour of deleting or merging it with something else. ChessCreator (talk) 16:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Boldface
Would be happy to work on boldface of opening names, although at the moment I don't understand what' required. Left reply here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chess ChessCreator (talk) 01:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- Still don't understand what 'boldface' is. ChessCreator (talk) 00:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I see what you've done in the Sicilian Defence and it makes sense now. ChessCreator (talk) 01:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
