Talk:World Chess Championship 1984

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chess. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	Chess Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-Importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Combine with 1985 match?

I wonder whether this article should be renamed to World Chess Championship 1984-1985 and include the 1985 match.

Pros:

• It solves the problem of allocating a winner to the 1984 match in other places such as Template:World Chess Championships. (Then again I've just altered the template to create another solution).
• The two matches were part of the same cycle. (Then again so were the 1958, 1961 and 1986 rematches).
• The 1984 match was unfinished, so it's not the same as the rematches in 1958, 1961 and 1986.
• The 1984 match actually went into 1985, so merging the articles prevents messy naming.

Cons:

• Some (most?) sources speak of them as separate matches, e.g. Mark Weeks' chess pages and Raymond Keene's book on the 1986 match both number the 1984, 1985 and 1986 matches as the first, second and third Karpov-Kasparov matches respectively.

Peter Ballard (talk) 03:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I'd keep them separate. In addition to the con that you mention (most sources consider the matches separate), there's also the issue of length. This article could (and should) be expanded substantially. The Candidates Matches are discussed only very briefly, and we don't even list the cities for most of the matches. There's essentially no discussion of the individual games in the championship, which makes sense for most of the draws but not the decisive games and a few near misses. Also, there's a lot more to be said (based on good sources) about the extremely controversial termination of the match. I don't generally advocate creating little articles in the anticipation that some day they may be too large if they had instead been kept together (write the main article first, split later as needed is a better policy), but here we have an extremely natural division and the article is already separate and not that small even in its current incomplete state. This may seem to be (or maybe just is) inconsistent with my opinion that Interregnum of World Chess Champions should be merged into World Chess Championship 1948, but I tried to explain the reasons for that suggestion at Talk:Interregnum of World Chess Champions. Quale (talk) 04:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)