Talk:44th Chess Olympiad

Was it "rescheduled"?

The article states that the Olympiad originally set to take place in 2020 was "postponed and rescheduled".

If in fact it was rescheduled, then the article ought to mention what the new schedule is. 2601:200:C000:1A0:8D60:6CA:D581:DFFB (talk) 16:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Mascot image

Could someone add the image of the mascot "Thambi"? MS2P (talk) 10:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Is there an available image under free licence?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:16, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

No idea :) That's why I asked ! MS2P (talk) 10:43, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Make a column for Individual Medal winners

An individual medal summary for every Individual Board Medal Winners should also be included in the Summary of both Open and Women Section. JokerDurden (talk) 08:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Did it. JokerDurden (talk) 13:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

More photos

Why isn't there any photo of the actual Torch, the Hotel venue and any big player like Carlsen or Caruana playing in the Olympiad?? JokerDurden (talk) 09:23, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:44th Chess Olympiad/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 11:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

I'll take this review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   see 2D

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Earwig shows 21% risk, so a good level. Will do a source spotcheck for plagiarism, OR, and close paraphrasing. Done successfully.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

I will get to this review in the next week. If you have time, please consider reviewing an article at WP:GAN. I will be using this review in the WikiCup. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29: Any progress? Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay. Will get started now. Some points to begin with:

• Per WP:LEAD, "a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs". Six rather messy paragraphs do not satisfy the criteria.
• Notes need to be cited.
• Some citations could be improved in format/layout: 2, 49, 123.
• Per MOS:OVERSECTION, "short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading." This applies to the short pararaphs in the preparations, marketing, broadcasting, and concerns sections.
• "Women's" vs "women's" needs to be standardised
• "The women's tournament featured three of the ten top players according to the FIDE rating list published in July 2022: sisters Mariya Muzychuk and Anna Muzychuk plus Nana Dzagnidze." must be cited as it is a statistic.

Placing this on hold while work goes on. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29: Thanks for the review. I've improved the article in line with the points above. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:22, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Passing now. Congratulations! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

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.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Bruxton (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the 44th Chess Olympiad was the first Chess Olympiad to feature a torch relay? Source: FIDE
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: I was thinking for a while about what would be a good piece of knowledge for our readers, but this one was really striking amongst the others interesting facts in the article.

Improved to Good Article status by Kiril Simeonovski (talk). Self-nominated at 07:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/44th Chess Olympiad; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - n
• Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Kiril Simeonovski: Good article. But, i'm not exactly seeing where it says it was the first chess tournament to feature a torch relay in the source provided. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

• @Onegreatjoke: It's clearly stated in the first sentence of the "Torch relay" sub-section, which reads A torch relay was held prior to the event, the first for a Chess Olympiad.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Other sources confirm the hook. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

• Kiril Simeonovski, c1 of the supplementary guidelines disallows links to disambiguation pages in hooks. would you prefer to replace the link to "torch relay" with something else? dying (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

@Dying: As we don’t have articles about torch relays, the most sensible option to me was to unlink that term.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Jahongir Vakhidov, should we change it to Jakhongir

Throughout the article the Uzbek grandmaster Jakhongir Vakhidov, best board 4 player for that tournament is consistently spelled "Jahongir". I'm not sure if that's how his name was spelt in articles during 2022, but his wiki article has a k in his name, as do all websites with him now. I was going to just change it myself but it's a featured article and I'm not sure if this is intentional. Kika.txt (talk) 10:39, 14 June 2024 (UTC)