Talk:Erwin l'Ami

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Erwin l'Ami. 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/20111020184547/http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/chessnews/events/world-cup-2009 to http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/chessnews/events/world-cup-2009

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:47, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Please Stop Removing Content
Please, stop removing the sentence which says that L'Ami emerged as one of the newer generation of Dutch players... Also, the description of his marriage is too shallow to warrant a subheading of its own --Kingdamian1 (talk) 15:07, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You should give a reason for your changes in the edit summary, especially when reverting non-vandalism. I gave the reasoning that the line is unsourced, and it can be removed for that reason alone, per WP:V. The statement is also out-of-date. l'Ami is over 30, as are the others mentioned—they are not "young players". His marriage is not relevant to his notability so should not be mentioned in the lead, per MOS:BLPLEAD. The line about his marriage is also unsourced so it could be removed too if one was to be very stringent about the application of WP:V, or sources could be added to expand the article as a whole, including detail on his personal life. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:33, 11 May 2018 (UTC)


 * The statement said that L'Ami emerged as one of the new generation of younger players for Netherlands... It does not say that L'Ami is a young player... When he emerged he was along with other who are LISTED there... You can check those Grandmasters out... they hit their peaks at about the same time as L'Ami, just click on those guys... --Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The statement is still in the article and states "young players", not "younger players". Also, it is unsourced, and that needs to be addressed before any other discussion. Hrodvarsson (talk) 23:14, 11 May 2018 (UTC)


 * AT THE TIME, they were young... Do you get it? At the time they emerged they were the young generation... this will be true even if they are 100... As for the source, people can click on those people, and it will show them that those Grandmasters hit their peaks at about the same time --Kingdamian1 (talk) 23:45, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * "At the time" is not used in the line. Also, using ALLCAPS is considered shouting, so please do not do that again. Regarding the source, what you are advocating is original research, which is not allowed. Present a reliable source for the statement or I will remove it as unsourced. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I am just going to ignore you on the first part, since I do not understand what you say... Original research is work that is NOT verifiable otherwise. So, If I were to write a new study that about disorders, which may be true, but has never been written before and I am the first person to do the research then I am doing the original research... This is a simple statement... If you click on Jan Smeets for example, you see that he hit his career peak at about the same time as L'Ami and he is dutch... Both of these are verifiable...

--Kingdamian1 (talk) 03:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That's now how WP:V works. Statements need to be supported by reliable sources. If you do not understand what I meant and are going to selectively ignore comments I make, then there is no point in further discussing this with you. I am going to remove the unsourced line again. Do not restore it without providing a reliable source. Hrodvarsson (talk) 22:14, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The provided source did not support the content (it mentioned the names in a list of players but said nothing about the persons), so the claim was still original research. In any case, the names of other chess players are irrelevant in this article, especially in the lead. --bonadea contributions talk 18:41, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Fine, you win... Kingdamian1 (talk) 04:53, 17 May 2018 (UTC)