Talk:Outline of chess

Outlines Top‑importance

	This article is an outline, a type of article that presents a list of articles or sub-topics related to its subject in a hierarchical form. For the standardized set of outlines on Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Contents/Outlines. Outlines are within the scope of WikiProject Outlines, a collaborative effort to improve outlines on Wikipedia. For guidance on building and maintaining outlines, see Wikipedia:Outlines.OutlinesWikipedia:WikiProject OutlinesTemplate:WikiProject OutlinesOutlines articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Chess Top‑importance

	Chess portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nature of chess

Chess is art also, at least in opinion of many chess players such as Alekhine and many others.

possible additions

Important tournaments, chess organizations, chess publications, chess rating systems, chess titles, and tournament systems (Swiss, round-robin, and knockout matches). Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 20:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Getting there slowly. Found chess boxing today. Will add the kitchen sink eventually. :) All feedback and collaboration welcome. The Transhumanist 04:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

to be added

To be added somewhere: computer chess, correspondence chess, fast chess. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done What else is missing? The Transhumanist 04:14, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shaping up

This article is shaping up really well. If you want an overview of chess, this may be better than the chess article. But not many people view it, maybe 20 per day. There are links to it from chess, rules of chess, glossary of chess, but strangely it doesn't get many viewers. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 06:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prokeš maneuver

Prokeš maneuver (in endgames) is now a redirect. Should it be taken out of the Outline (it isn't very important). Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 19:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This outline improved my game a great deal

Editing this outline has increased my chess situational awareness immensely. Players who were beating me about half of the time win about 1 in 5 against me now. I recently took on 4 college chess club members at the same time and beat them all. I found the fundamental tactics section to be especially useful. The Transhumanist 18:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a really good overview (of course, you did most of the work on it). I'm surprised that it isn't read very often - fewer than 100 times per day. There are links to it in many other articles. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 22:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Descriptions To Variants

Hi, I was adding descriptions to variants and I intended to keep adding, but Toccata Quarta reverted them. I'm sorry but I can't see why brief descriptions wouldn't be better on each variant, considering that not every person will be interested in clicking each one of them to understand what it is about. Also, the format of brief descriptions next to each link is the same as any other areas of the article, so I would like to hear from Toccata Quarta how can it be "faulty", and why can other sections of the article have them and not variants, which seems illogical to me. I think they would only help and I was going to complete the work, so I wait for an explanation, otherwise I will keep working on it as I was before. GreyWinterOwl (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TC did not respond, so I'm back to my previous edits GreyWinterOwl (talk) 10:18, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There were primarily reverted because you included the hypen within the link brackets which is not correct form. It was so fundamentally wrong, it proves that you have a lot to learn, as you could not even see why. Therefore it would be best for you to start at the beginning and do a Wikipedia 101. Try starting here, WP:PUMP.

Almost everyone editing the Wikipedia is an unpaid volunteer. They do not have any obligation to spoonfeed you and so do not expect them to spend their time pandering to your every whim nor explaining every action. Learn from negative reactions. You'll find that a lot of your early edits are just reverted until you work out what is going on. If you are lucky, you might fin a kindly soul who is willing to tutor you.

If you don't know, which you don't, it's always better to ask first on the talk page first. --Januarythe18th (talk) 14:09, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Januarythe18th, it's incumbent on an editor to explain why he made a change and "formatting is faulty" is not a good enough explanation by wikipedia's standards. __209.179.37.199 (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication

Outline of chess#Checkmate patterns is much the same as "Checkmates in the opening" at Outline of chess#Chess openings. Art LaPella (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines

"Outline" is short for "hierarchical outline". There are two types of outlines: sentence outlines (like those you made in school to plan a paper), and topic outlines (like the topical synopses that professors hand out at the beginning of a college course). Outlines on Wikipedia are primarily topic outlines that serve 2 main purposes: they provide taxonomical classification of subjects showing what topics belong to a subject and how they are related to each other (via their placement in the tree structure), and as subject-based tables of contents linked to topics in the encyclopedia. The hierarchy is maintained through the use of heading levels and indented bullets. See Wikipedia:Outlines for a more in-depth explanation. The Transhumanist 00:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

heading

@MaxBrowne2 the outline header is pretty quirky, I agree, but I also think it's very specific in what it's doing for the reader. "Descriptions" feels a little murky by comparison, but it's probably fine. Remsense诉 12:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]