Talk:Bill Hook (chess player)

Notability
Can someone please explain to me the notability of this person ? SyG 08:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we ought to get too hung up on rating or titles, or whatever. Hook is something of a folklore legend, having been a national champion, the captain of his national team and a gold medal winner at the Olympiad - these are very impressive credentials in their own right. He narrowly missed another gold medal also, taking the silver on that occasion. Okay, he may be most remembered for that loss to Fischer, but this too was notable as the 'David vs Goliath' chess tale of its time - the game features in Keene's book of the Siegen Olympiad. Hook is also acknowledged as a credible writer on chess, having been published in New in Chess, arguably the worlds foremost chess magazine. His games have featured in other articles by Grandmasters (e.g. Lubosh Kavalek on Chessbase, if I remember correctly) and have even featured on postage stamps - not many GMs have that kind of honour bestowed on them! I think we need to embrace the diversity of chess rather than take a purely elitist view. That said, what do others think? Brittle heaven 16:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. I've argued in other similar cases that either winning a national championship or playing on an Olympiad team is sufficient for notability, as to my way of thinking it meets the WP:BIO requirements: "The person has received significant recognized awards or honors." (the championship title), or "Competitors who have played or competed at the highest level in amateur sports (who meet the general criteria of secondary sources published about them)."  There's absolutely no doubt that not all national championships are equally notable, and in most years the last place finisher in the USSR Chess Championship would have been a stronger chess player than the best in the Virgin Islands.  I'm not really interested in a fight over which national championships we regard as notable and which we don't.  Instead, I think sources are the key.  In order to actually have an article we need to meet WP:V with WP:RS reliable sources.  I think this bio meets the notability requirements, and although it is currently a little weak on sources that should be fixable.  There was a discussion on a similar point at WT:CHESS a while ago, where some concern was expressed that we aren't creating chess bios in some "priority order" (say by decreasing Elo rating).  I agree that this could be a concern if we were missing many bios for the most important players, but our coverage is currently pretty good.  Worrying about what order similar pages get created in is generally not productive.  Anyone concerned that there are more important chess players than Bill Hook who don't yet have articles is encouraged to start those missing articles.  There's room for both.  Quale 19:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Bill Hook. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111204194433/http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/twic809.html to http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/twic809.html#21

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:07, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Possible additional source
Ryan Grim just wrote a piece in memory of Bill's wife Mimi Hook that may contain some further information useful for this article. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 01:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC)