Talk:List of World Chess Championships

Flags

World Chess Championship 1886 claims that Steinitz wanted the US flag placed beside him. Did he get it?

If he did, then there is an inconsistency with regards to flags: Nepomniachtchi 2021 is not given the Russian flag, because even though he's Russian he didn't play under it; but Steinitz 1886 is given the Austro-Hungarian flag, which he didn't play under despite that being his country. Of course, if he didn't, then there's no problem. Double sharp (talk) 10:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't know if this is the right place to put this, but under "Other", in the 1992 match with Boris Spassky and Bobby Fischer, Spassky has a French flag instead of a Russian one. A fenian (talk) 02:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

That's correct: Spassky became a French citizen in 1978. Double sharp (talk) 04:25, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

I've been mulling over how to best present the flags. In any case, would it be uncontroversial that we should probably not primarily display the FIDE flag for country-punishing purposes? Remsense聊 18:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

@Remsense: I think that we should be consistent about always showing the flag the players actually played with. So the recent championships should show Nepo with the FIDE flag, but Steinitz 1886 should also get the USA flag and Kasparov 1990 the Russian tricolour. Double sharp (talk) 05:12, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, as long as it's consistent to some schema. That would be the easiest, I would support that. Remsense聊 19:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

W, L, D vs. (W + D/2), GP

So, I am genuinely conflicted as to whether the scores (at least for the matches) should be presented as columns of W, L, and D, or as a traditional score column, plus a 'games played' column. i think the latter is arguably more helpful to those familiar with chess, but the former requires only trivial calculation to get the information of the latter out.

• "Euwe | 15½–14½ | Alekhine | 30 GP" versus
• "Euwe | Alekhine | 9W | 8L | 13D"

thoughts? Remsense留 23:57, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Right now you have a W column, an L column, and a D column, and that is normally fine (for me).

However, your notation for tiebreaks is something I've never seen before. For instance, for Kramnik vs. Topalov 2006, you have 3+2 W, 3+1 L, 6+1 D. Besides being hard to comprehend, this is unfamiliar. I suggest instead something like

3 3 6

2 1 1 (tiebreak)

Bruce leverett (talk) 05:03, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree—I'm currently tweaking the table columns in my userspace, and of course there are enough edge cases where nothing quite fits right. Remsense留 05:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bruce leverett and anyone else, what do you think of the new presentation at the top of this page? Remsense留 19:53, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response, been busy, I plan to comment on this. Bruce leverett (talk) 22:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Bruce leverett, no rush! Take your time. Remsense留 22:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Some comments:

• The G column seems redundant in most cases. What is the point of it?
• For a knockout tournament of matches like 1999, it is obtuse to give Khalifman's total score in individual games. All that mattered was that he won all his matches. Perhaps there were rivals who scored more points, by virtue of having played longer matches. By the way, it looks to me like he played 36 games, not 32, and got 22 points, not 18½.

I haven't thought of a suggestion for how to concisely summarize the winner's performance in such a format. Most likely more, and at any rate different, columns will be needed.

• The choice between, say, 6-4 and 6/10 seems to me to be arbitrary, that is, they both convey the same information. I don't see why you have sometimes used one and sometimes used the other. Alert readers will try to read something into this choice. I recommend consistently use one of them. I am a bit more comfortable with 6-4, but I can't put my finger on why, so that's not a strong recommendation.
• There's no explanation, in the "Key" section, for the superscripted number in parentheses next to the loser's name in 2012, 2016, 2018, 2023. Hmm, I see that it has to do with tiebreaks. I don't like this: in, for example, 2018, we see a score of 9-6, with the superscript notation indicating that there were three tiebreaks. It is confusing to combine the 6-6 score in the classical games with the 3-0 score in tiebreak rapid games. I don't think you will find any of our sources that summarizes the match score(s) in this way. You may need more columns here.

I'll try to find time for more of this, but it's late at night. Bruce leverett (talk) 05:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your insight!

• I've attempted what I've understood to be the usual presentation of match results (with an en dash) and tournament results (with a slash). But you are right, that's totally redundant. Would you say I should just use the en dash (since it's more legible with the ½?
• The G column is likely also redundant. I thought about the slightly novel use of something like the {{su}} template to get a result like 20¹⁰
  ₅ for 10W-5L-5D, but that's getting way too cute. There's just enough edge cases that it's driving me a little crazy!
• Thank you regarding Khalifman etc., I knew I would miscount somewhere.

Remsense留 06:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Aha! I think I solved the biggest issue, as is now reflected—I've put the tiebreaks below a dashed line in the cell—it seems intuitive and inline with the presentation on individual championship articles. I think I'm about ready to transfer the new presentation over to the mainspace article if no one objects. what do you think? Remsense留 23:02, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Looks much better.

The things in the Format column are not complete sentences, and so don't have to end with periods.

The "Other" table needs more explanation of what things are doing there. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I'll be going through every item and removing the ones that I can't source, and nuancing the ones that need as such. Thanks for the help! Remsense留 20:59, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Time control

Should time control be included in the "Format" column? I had a hard enough time sourcing the locations of every game, but at least time controls wouldn't change from match to match. Remsense诉 08:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Sources?

The section headers for Predecessor events, Privately organized matches, Fide World Championships (1948-1990), Split title, and Fide World Championships (2006-present) have, between them, approximately zero citations, but lots of material that could be challenged. Bruce leverett (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Bruce leverett, I allowed myself to write the prose extemporaneously and cite it later, though it's a bad habit—I was just getting to putting citations in as we speak. — Remsense诉 22:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@Bruce leverett, I think I'm almost ready to submit it as a FLC. What do you think? — Remsense诉 04:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Much improved. Bruce leverett (talk) 16:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

World Chess Championship 1978

The event happened in the City of Baguio not Manila, get it right. 120.29.69.128 (talk) 02:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. You are correct and the page has been updated. Quale (talk) 05:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

archivebot

What is the story of the recent archiving and reversion? Where is "archivebot" set to "disallow", and why? I am asking because the same archiving just happened over at History of chess. Bruce leverett (talk) 13:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

1862 results

@Sitbear: note that Anderssen had an actual game performance of +11=1-1 in 1862—byes and forfeits are not counted for maximum consistency with other tournaments. Remsense ‥ 论 00:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

A relevant AfD notice

There is an AfD of a fork of this article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of World Chess Championships. Informed here as it seems revelant. Please discuss and !vote as seems best and according to policy to you, to reach a consensus.DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2024 (UTC)