Talk:En passant/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sasata (talk) 14:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. Comments will follow later today. Sasata (talk) 14:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I have done a careful read through, and in my opinion, the article currently does not meet the criteria for GA. There was a lot of information about this move that was not covered by the article, and I don't believe the coverage is sufficiently broad. However, I've given a detailed list of what might be undertaken to improve the article, and I'll place the article on hold to allow time for the editor(s) to address the issues. Sasata (talk) 06:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The first paragraph (actually a sentence) of "Threefold repetition and stalemate" is really hard to parse, and I imagine it would hardly makes sense to someone who didn't already understand what it meant. Consider dividing the sentence into smaller more digestible fragments, or maybe given a couple of diagrams to illustrate. Also, a source is required; I imagine the ideal RS would be the relevant page in the FIDE handbook. ✅
 * this book here breaks down the legality of the e.p. capture into 4 "necessary conditions", perhaps a similar approach could be used in the article ✅
 * Consider adding a couple of descriptive words in front of Kenneth Harkness so we can know who he is without having to click another article to determine his authority... something like "Scottish organizer and arbiter" would be sufficient ✅
 * "The rules of chess were amended to make clear that the capture was mandatory in that instance (Winter 1999)." I think this is a pretty interesting and important aspect of this move's history, would it be possible to get a precise year on when this was clarified in the official rules? (this source might have more info) ✅
 * "In this line from the Petrov Defence" shouldn't that be Petrov's Defence? ✅
 * "... in this game between Gunnar Gundersen and A. H. Faul" Could we get the full name for A.H. so the name format can be the same? ✅
 * "Historically, allowing the en passant capture is one of the last major rule changes in European chess that occurred in the 14th to 15th century," Most other sources I've seen say 15th C, can this broadened date range be corroborated with another reference? ✅ (14th removed, however if it was during the time of Ruy López de Segura as in a reference you gave, it was in the 16th century. But my reference says before 1600.)
 * second paragraph in "Historical context" needs a source ✅
 * ISBN for the Official Chess Handbook? ✅
 * some things I'd like to see to fill out the coverage:
 * how often is en passant played at the GM level, and how frequently does the opportunity arise (someone has to have asked the same question, did a database search and published it somewhere)
 * if a RS can be found, what's the record for e.p. captures in a single game? ✅
 * I imagine e.p. captures have been used as a theme for chess problems and compositions. Any cool examples? (hint, check here and here for a couple examples, and here for themes involving retrograde analysis) ✅
 * why is it called by its French name?


 * check this for some more historical context
 * check here and here for Winter's take on when the term might have been first used, also in a ChessBase article here
 * any interesting anecdotes about the e.p. capture in relation to computer chess? (hint, check out here)
 * for a laugh, check out this 1970s ad for a Chess Challenger computer in Popular Mechanics ... "Moves even include castling and en passant!"
 * I suspect that this was something that one could have exploited on early chess computers: it seems to me that a computer would PxP e.p. whenever possible, even if not the best move. This would be the programmer showing off that he included even this obscurity. WHPratt (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * check out this quote from an 1875 rule book: "Formerly the Pawn was not permitted to take 'en passant.' The rule of taking 'en passant' was first established in Spain, in the time of Lopez, and subsequently adopted in France, England, and Germany, as giving more animation to the game. It is not allowed in Italy." ✅ - added that Italy adopted it in 1880.
 * this source says its the "rarest of moves", a fact which should certainly be added to the article


 * Several items done. The "rarest move" item may be too vague.  For instance, underpromotion is less common.  Bubba73 (the argument clinic), 03:38, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is unquestionably true - especially underpromotions to bishop, which are extremely rare, occurring in about .003% of games (see the statistics in underpromotion). Krakatoa (talk) 10:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Most e.p. in a game - a blog says that The Chess Companion by Chernov says that the record by one player in a game is 4, but I don't have the book and it is 50 years old so it may no longer be the record. Bubba73 (the argument clinic), 05:18, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Irving Chernev wrote on page 270 of The Chess Companion that the most en passant captures in one game was by Louis Paulsen, who played four (out of six possible) in his game against Adolf Anderssen at Baden-Baden 1870. However, Edward Winter writes:"This comes from an 'Interlude' feature (mixing spoof statistics with genuine ones) which had originally been published on the inside front cover of the July 1952 Chess Review. To all appearances, the en passant item was one of those intended to be taken seriously, but we have been unable to locate any such game." Indeed, Chessgames.com has five games between Paulsen and Anderssen at Baden-Baden 1870, but none has four (or even two) en passant captures. Bruce Pandolfini parroted Chernev’s claim in one of his books, but also could find no such game when a reader questioned him.


 * Winter also notes that Christian Sanchez did a database search and found three games with three en passant captures - in no case were all by the same player. The earliest such game was A. Segal-K. Podzielny, Dortmund 1980. Edward Winter, Chess Facts and Fables, McFarland, 2006, pp. 98-99. ISBN 0-7864-2310-2. Surprisingly, Tim Krabbé on his Chess Records page does not address the subject. Krakatoa (talk) 11:00, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Here is the score of Alexandru Sorin Segal-Karl Heinz Podzielny, Dortmund 1980: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 4.Nc3 exd5 5.cxd5 d6 6.e4 g6 7.f4 Bg7 8.Nf3 O-O 9.Be2 Re8 10.Nd2 a6 11.a4 Nbd7 12.O-O Rb8 13.a5 Qc7 14.Qc2 b5 15.axb6 e.p. Nxb6 16.Bf3 c4 17.Kh1 Bh6 18.Ne2 Qc5 19.b4 cxb3 e.p. 20.Qxb3 Qc7 21.Qd3 Bd7 22.Rxa6 Nbxd5 23.Qd4 Bb5 24.Ra7 Qc5 25.Qxc5 dxc5 26.exd5 Bxe2 27.Bxe2 Rxe2 28.d6 Bf8 29.f5 gxf5 30.Ra6 Rd8 31.Nc4 Re4 32.Ne3 Rxd6 33.Ra8 f4 34.Nf5 Rd5 35.g4 fxg3 e.p. 36.Nxg3 Re8 37.Ra2 Bg7 38.Nf5 Kf8 39.Nxg7 Kxg7 40.Rg2+ Kf8 41.Bh6+ Ke7 42.Bg5 Rxg5 43.Rxg5 Rg8 44.Rxc5 Rg6 45.Rc8 Nd5 46.Ra8 Rf6 47.Rb1 Rf5 48.Rh8 h5 49.Re1+ Kf6 50.Rh6+ Kg7 51.Rd6 Kh7 52.Ra6 Nc7 53.Raa1 Ne6 54.Rf1 Rxf1+ 55.Rxf1 Kg6 56.Kg2 Nd4 57.Ra1 Kg5 58.Ra5+ f5 59.h4+ Kf4 60.Ra6 Ne2 61.Rg6 Nd4 62.Rg8 Nc6 63.Rg5 Ne5 64.Kh3 Nd3 65.Rxh5 Nf2+ 66.Kg2 Kg4 67.Rh8 Nd3 68.Rg8+ Kxh4 69.Kf3 Kh5 70.Re8 Kg5 1/2-1/2 Krakatoa (talk) 11:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

continued:
 * the lead needs reorganizing, specifically, most of the new added info should be moved down into their appropriate sections. There shouldn't be anything in the lead that isn't in the body of the article. Also, I think the images of the two pawns should be removed (they don't do anything to aid reader comprehension), and the other image sequence can be moved up.
 * Shouldn't the article title be italicized?
 * I'd like to add a section on the use of en passant in chess composition, as mentioned above; will run it past here first before adding it though. I'll also email some friends with bigger chess libraries than me, they might be able to help find sources regarding e.p. frequency in GM games & other stats. Sasata (talk) 17:12, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Many chess articles have images of the pieces involved, for instance Promotion (chess), Rook and pawn versus rook endgame, and opposite-colored bishops endgame. I thought that article titles could not be italicized, but I could be wrong.  The lead does need revision.  Bubba73 (the argument clinic), 18:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I used to think that too, but there are lots of articles with italicized titles, including Featured Articles - see WP:FA. Krakatoa (talk) 09:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I have italicized the title. I still think the two pawns should be removed... the fact that other articles have similar images suggests they haven't been through GAN yet and haven't been questioned :) Seriously, the second image shows the e.p. capture clearly, and it is blatantly obvious from that that only pawns are involved. Also, it mentions in the lead recording of the e.p. capture with notation, but this isn't anywhere else in the article. The lead needs to be a summary of the article's contents and should not have unique information in it. I think it might be worthwhile to use that information that Krakatoa found and incorporate it into the article somewhere. Still working on a section on e.p. in composition... I've been distracted. Sasata (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok how's this? Feel free to copy paste if you think it improves the article (and I won't be offended if you don't!). Sasata (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

In chess composition
En passant captures have often been used as a theme in chess compositions, as they "produce striking effects in the opening and closing of lines." . In the 1938 composition by Kenneth S. Howard, the first move 1.d4 introduces the threat of 2.d5+ cxd5 3.Bxd5#. Black may capture the d4 pawn en passant in either of two ways:
 * The capture 1...exd3 e.p. shifts the e4 pawn from the e- to the d-file, preventing an en passant capture after White plays 2.f4. To stop the threatened mate (3.f5#), Black may advance 2...f5, but this allows White to play 3.exf6 with checkmate due to the decisive e-file opening.
 * If Black plays 1...cxd3 e.p., White exploits the newly-opened a2-g8 diagonal with 2.Qa2+ d5 3.cxd6 e.p.#.


 * Your proposed section looks good to me, so I have added it. I also added the game I found with three en passant captures, as you had suggested. Krakatoa (talk) 12:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Your proposed section looks good to me, so I have added it. I also added the game I found with three en passant captures, as you had suggested. Krakatoa (talk) 12:27, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Update: Ok, I think we'll be good to go once the lead is fixed... currently, the article body does not actually explain the en passant rule, it's only in the lead; there shouldn't be anything in the lead that's not covered in the article body as well. Same thing for the notation explanation. Also, the new section on composition should be mentioned in the lead. I'm not a fan of the pawn pictures, but won't oppose promotion over it. Sasata (talk) 07:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I've worked on the lead - moved some of that to a new section stating the rule. I also reworked the history section. Composition added to the lead.  Notation moved from the lead to its own section. Bubba73 (Who's attacking me now?), 04:57, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

All of my main concerns have been addressed, so I will promote the article. Congratulations on another GA for the Chess Project! Sasata (talk) 17:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Clearly written, complies with MoS.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c(OR):
 * Article has sufficient references, and they are reliable sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Covers the basics of the topic. Some suggestions for expansion may be found in the review.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: