Talk:Chess World Cup 2015

Zone 4.4[edit]

Zone 4.4 will have 1 spot. Which qualification path will reduce 1 spot? بنفش من شما را دوست دارم (talk) 00:31, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sasikiran[edit]

Krishnan Sasikiran (IND), 2681 (Z3.7) - it is wrong I think 188.123.241.228 (talk) 06:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Zone names[edit]

Regarding this:

Z2.1 (5), Z2.2 (1), Z2.3 (2), Z2.4 (2), Z2.5 (2), Z3.1 (1), Z3.2 (1), Z3.3 (2), Z3.4 (2), Z3.5 (2), Z3.6 (1), Z3.7 (1), Z4.1 (1), Z4.2 (1), Z4.3 (1), Z4.4 (1): Zonal tournaments

Can someone please add in notes on which each zone is? Kingturtle = (talk) 19:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Travel Expenses[edit]

The prize money appears to be very impressive unless the players do not receive travel and lodging expenses. Does anyone know? Abenr (talk) 15:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong score given for Lu Shanglei-Wang Hao[edit]

It appears from http://www.chessdom.com/fide-world-chess-cup-2015-live/ that Lu Shanglei won by 2-0, not 1.5-.5 as given in the article. Krakatoa (talk) 14:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chessdom is wrong there then. Official site has a draw. -Koppapa (talk) 16:30, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Entering flags before the result is known[edit]

Not only does it look odd (i.e., not what you'd expect to see in a newspaper or magazine), it is invalid to enter a flag before the identity of the player in the next round is known. How do we know there won't be a double disqualification? How do we know the winner won't renounce their citizenship or transfer federations? How do we know they won't both get a sudden bout of food poisoning and be forced to withdraw from the tournament? WP:CRYSTAL is the relevant policy here. MaxBrowne (talk) 02:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is not invalid, as it is not speculation. It is more than reasonable to assume that if two players in the previous round are Chinese, one in the next round will be Chinese. WP:CRYSTAL does not apply here - your speculative suggestions of what could go wrong are the equivalent of speculating that the 2016 US election will not be held in 2016 due to the imposition of martial law, and so that article about a future event should not exist. Possible, but hardly likely. Greenman (talk) 13:20, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say it's invalid, just pointless and a little dumb. There's no need to enter a flag in a bracket cell before the player is known. It is not a service to the reader and it looks like a mistake. Anyone who sees it will wonder, "Why did they do that, is it a mistake?", and it's foolish to cause the reader to waste time trying to figure out what the heck is going on. It can wait until the player is put in the cell. Quale (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is not invalid. It is a known countries already. Try to see any tennis wiki article with current bracket. 178.94.166.183 (talk) 14:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a useful feature, and I find it interesting to know the nationality of an opponent or representative in the next round. As the anonymous editor pointed out, many similar articles do it. Quale, I think you may be in the minority in not understanding why the flag is there :) Greenman (talk) 18:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well if anyone's keeping score (and that is not the way "consensus" is determined) it is 2-2 so far. Quale's argument can be summarized as "it looks like crap", and I concur. Our guideline should not be "what do wikipedia tennis editors do?" but "what do professional sports publications do?". I bet you can't find a single professional publication that enters flags before the identity of the player is known - that's assuming they use flags at all. MaxBrowne (talk) 01:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why the flag is there—some wikipedia editors have too much free time and not enough common sense, so they make articles a little worse. It is not a "useful feature". It's a bad idea, and if you think it's a good idea, then you lack good judgment. There's a reason why no professional publication does this. In fact a professional publication wouldn't even waste 5 seconds thinking about doing it, because it's pointless and idiotic. If some Wikipedia editors do this in tennis articles then they also lack good judgment. Try to emulate the best editors, not the mediocre ones. Quale (talk) 02:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Entering a flag is not different to chessbase (and other prof. publication) saying a Chinese is guaranteed a place in the quarter-finals. But it doesn't matter anyway, it resolves itself after just 3 days here. -Koppapa (talk) 06:27, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The analogy I'd use is entering the winner of a Caruana vs Carlsen match as "Car...." before the result is known. Yes, barring double disqualifications etc the winner's name will begin with "Car" and have 7 letters, but this is hardly useful information. MaxBrowne (talk) 11:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Entering a flag is not remotely similar to that. But if you want to write some prose in the article body saying that a Chinese player is guaranteed a spot in the quarter finals, go for it. That is not different from what professional publications do, and it would be fine. Quale (talk) 03:10, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

massive amount of errors[edit]

it is held in berlin and not baku and on october 10. 84.213.45.196 (talk) 12:11, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]