Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alvaro Dias Huizar


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Black Kite (talk) 00:14, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Alvaro Dias Huizar

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lacks notability. Generally chess players need to be Grandmasters to be notable players. International Masters are below that, and FIDE masters (as this person is) are below that. And his rating has dropped significantly from its peak. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In order to try to keep this article i notice the administrators some of the changes executed: Concerning the article: 1.- Add references and titles, 2.-Complete biographical informaion  3.- Attach FIDE reglament and Application title- Justify the level got of this player some years before.  4.- In the discussion explain personal position about notability in this particular case and some technical aspects concerning the FIDE reglament 5.- Add a category, 6.- Delate external links not reliable with the article and delate a photo considering it, not authorized to FIDE players (probably reserved only to Grand Masters). After read the arguments consider this article only like stub. Robertjor23 (talk) 21:35 10 November 2013 (UTC)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.161.121.110 (talk)


 * Delete. I agree with the nomination. In some cases a player who has not gained the GM title may be notable by winning a national champion, or gain notability as an author, but I cannot see that is the case here. Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:37, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. No justification to keep. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:12, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. This person has notability by his profession (law) other than chess (that is not the common case of chess players, the majority of them without University studies). He won local Open tournaments in France defeating International and Grand Masters, considering that chess is not a common sport in his country his international background is notable. The rating is relative and the FIDE titles like FIDE Master are recognized by FIDE (Federation International d'échecs) in his page. Probably the photo in the infobox could be remove because is reserved to Grand Masters category. Robertjor23 (talk) 2:45 3/11/2013 (UTC)
 * The only tournament win the article mentions is this one, where he tied with two others for first place. But he wasn't competing against masters, much less grandmasters.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:39, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * In the detail tournament effectevily he played against International Master Atanas Kizov (won) and International Master Andelkenjo (draw) this one 14:52 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * And as far as his country, he is the 87th-highest rated, and that is only counting ones with FIDE ratings, and a lot of similar players probably don't have FIDE ratings. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * To become a FIDE player is not easy, read the article 7.14 Fide reglament here 14:52 4 November 2013 (UTC). Consider that he is not an active player but he has the title because he was ranked top and get the 2300 points required to FIDE title.
 * Not true. One does not need to get a 2300 rating to get the FM title: there are many alternative ways (50% score at a Zonal tournament, for example). And the player in question has never reached 2300 anyway. Even if he did, that still wouldn't be enough to establish notability. Also, sock alert... Cobblet (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * True. This person had 2350 in 1994. FIDE never done a Title without accomplish the rules of the reglament title.Tifany87 9:24 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep About Notability . Article and list topics must be notable, or "worthy of notice". Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below. A topic is presumed to merit an article if it meets the general notability guideline below, and is not excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy. Notability requires (verifiable evidence). In relation with his rating effectively he get even 2350 in 1994. Here the email address: Federation International d'échecs  and Federacion Venezolana Ajedrez  Tifany87 9:08 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with all of the points made above. Not notable. Brittle heaven (talk) 12:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete The 29,315th-ranked chess player in the world is not notable. Cobblet (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That is only counting FIDE ratings. In the US, most of the players in his range don't have FIDE ratings.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * And that is also true of many other countries. Cobblet (talk) 01:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:03, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. A Chess Master is nothing in the world. In this case common people drinking wine have the right to become wikipedian. Why chess is recognized? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:660:7220:385:193:52:103:33 (talk) 09:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Chess is an art, is complex, is different, there are 600 millions of people in the planet who knows to play chess. Nothing in the world??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertjor23 (talk • contribs)


 * Keep Dear Bubba73: I wrote you in order to explain you respectfully the reason of my article.
 * Firstly, this article was created folowing the right confered by a formal wikipedia category (FIDE Masters); secondly, concerning notablity, it could be posible make a stub of this person because is a rare case in his poor country become a chess master, having many nationalities and becoming PhD in Law in France making him strange personality in chess world. Third, there are other players FIDE Masters in wikipedia that never study nothing and however they are in wiki because only participated as a second in a chess Olimpiad or a cheater like Ivanov Borislav without nothing of merit to become a FIDE Master. If you play chess probably you know the difficulty to become a Master and more when you'are a lawyer, engineer or other...like Kamsky. (. Concerning the raiting, you know that chess raiting are relative each year, it depends of your time and money to play tournaments; the more important case Anand (He is not the best ELO in the world but he is the World Champion, other example Bobby Fischer die not with the title or the raiting prouving his level, but everybody knows him one of the best ever! I coincide with you that not all FIDE Masters have the right to be there because they are only that (a common chess players); particularly in this case i know Mr Dias in a tournament last year and his personality is awesome by his intelectual discuss and his chess capacity. In all case if the decision is delate the article consider also propose disappear the category FIDE Master on wikipedia.
 * Respectfully and kind regards. fidebairawiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fidebairawiki (talk • contribs) 10:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with Fidebaira, in this case is not the rating or ranking that prouve the notability. He has the title and he is from Venezuela, not from Russia!, considering that his peak was 2350 it means he was in the first 4000 in the world! There are all his games on the database drawing with Grand Master! The game against Dvirnyy 400 world, prouve his force . Chess is most popular licencied game than football but however there are many football players of third division in wikipedia. Gens una sumuus, come on!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.161.121.110 (talk) 12:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 *  Keep  The main point is that there is a category for him. Even more stronger peak than other FIDE Masters on wiki. A retired player with a lot of nationalities, speaking many languages i suposse. PhD in UK and France (prouved). Young lawyer and Mensa member. We can see sometimes people, in special politicians or artist without talent on wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertjor23 (talk • contribs)


 * That there's a category proves nothing: we've categories "Writers from Idaho", "Alumni of the University of Oxford", "People from Peoria, Illinois", etc, but that doesn't prove every writer from Idaho deserves an article, or everyone from Peoria. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:52, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I take your exemple, there are 42 writers from Idaho and not a single FIDE chess master, that prouve the difficulty or also probably because there are only 5000 aprox. FIDE masters in the world, considering that we are 7 thousand million humans now the question could be: how many FIDE Masters from Venezuela are International lawyers?, ok then, how many FIDE Masters and lawyers from Venezuela are Law Professors and PhD in Europe?, well, now the question how many of them defeated the Italian blitz champion in a tournament?, and how many of them won an open? I agree with your commentary but consider that he is in 2 special categories FIDE Masters | People from Venezuela. His country has 40 players titled players aprox. in all his chess history, now the question, how many of them stand out not only in chess? Probably this is my last argument, this defense become crazy!, lol  Robertjor23 (talk) 21:35 7 November 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.161.121.110 (talk)


 * As far as him winning an open tournament, the tournament listed has "open" in the title, but everyone in it was rated under 2200, which would be unusual for an open tournament. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 22:42, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Not at all, in this tournament participated other FIDE Masters and International Masters, Rc means average rating competion, not rating player this one you can also verify information about players in, probably it would be better before claim for Delation read more about Reglament. Respectfully  Robertjor23 (talk 18:25 8 November 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.161.121.110 (talk)
 * OK, I stand corrected on that point. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:36, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 *  Keep  Here the FIDE Title Regulations valid until 30 June 2013   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertjor23 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 *  Keep  Here the application form of Mr. Dias https://drive.google.com/file/d/13hOR5B2eFZfrSjh68M_zz0nwbOLC4EeTd4o3EKobN3pj3BjNUgWfMPVH15Bj/edit?usp=sharing For more information writte to International Chess Federation  and Federacion Venezolana Ajedrez  Tifany87 11:05 5 November 2013 (UTC).
 * Delete. Non notable re: reputable sources. What is up with all these ridiculously transparent sockpuppets voting "keep" on every obscure Chess IM deletion discussion these days? Titled Chess player, attorney, professor, and sockpuppet mastermind... By the way, "Tifany87," Tiffany is spelled with two "L"s.  Not only that but Debbie Gibson was a lot better in '87.  OUT, Monkeysnap (talk) 20:13, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Checkuser-confirmed sockpuppet account blocked indefinitely. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)


 * With all respect Mr. Monkeysnap|talk this space was created to argument for the people who understand the dinamic of the discussions, by the way, Chess is considered a mind sport discipline, is not correct criticise the valid sources and ironize demereting the titled. Explain with arguments why you consider this article inapropiate. Compare with the other FIDE Masters in wikipedia, analyse, propose...The defense about chess titled players is because only the people who plays this "mastermind sport", understand the difficulty of this game. Jalous of a sockpuppet master defending his article?, in all case say us why you consider the sources invalid. To be jalous or simply d'ont like this mind sport i'm affraid is not enough saying "ridiculously transparent sockpuppets voting "keep" on every obscure Chess IM deletion discussion these days?", what is the argument? Explain what is notablity for you, explain why you consider chess an inapropiate source of notability. Regards Robertjor23 (talk 22:23 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, no significant coverage in reliable sources. Toccata quarta (talk) 06:20, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note to closing editor: I have stricken the repeated "keep" votes. Toccata quarta (talk) 06:29, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. His chess accomplishments don't warrant a Wikipedia article, and I don't see any other claims to notability in the article. Quale (talk) 23:46, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Usually FM's that have a separate article have some other claim to notability. I don't really see that here. MaxBrowne (talk) 01:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: might be a stronger case for keeping the article if he were presented as a well known law professor who happens to be good at chess... if indeed it can be established that he is notable as a law professor. Instead he is being presented as a famous chess player, which he isn't. MaxBrowne (talk) 22:46, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Simply doesn't appear to be notable in Wikipedia terms as either a lawyer or a chess player StuartDouglas (talk) 13:35, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not meet notability criteria. Sasata (talk) 16:55, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity—although those may enhance the acceptability of a subject that meets the guidelines explained below. A topic is presumed to merit an article if it meets the general notability guideline below, and is not excluded under the What Wikipedia is not policy. Notability requires (verifiable evidence). Please, only explain with arguments your point of view. Compare with the other chess players in his category (Venezuela-Mexico or France) and then try to explain your vote to deletion. He is not presented as "a famous player" only as multifaceted person not common in his category (FIDE Masters) with many nationalities like Kamran Shirazi, Vladislav Tkachiev or some others. When you compare this guy with the other players from Mexico, Venezuela or France his merits other than chess are "notable", probably not the best French, probably not the best Mexican, probably not the best Venezuelan, probably not the best lawyer, probably not the best Doctor or professor, probably not the best chess player but all mixed is simply notable. Maybe MaxBrowne could help us to reformulate the presentation or rewrite the article in order to keep it as stub. If you analyse the Grand Master, International Masters or FIDE Masters categories 90% they are only that Chess Masters with 2 Olympiads in average and 2 or 3 games played then with 2420 elo average (3 categories mixed), the must common case of chess players is only play chess and nothing more, that is the point here to consider notability. Please before vote delete read the discussion and answer with more precision in where you consider necessary. Regards. Robertjor23 (talk 18:00 11 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.161.121.110 (talk)
 * From WP:Notability (people): "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[4] and independent of the subject.[5]" From WP:GNG: ""Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a passing mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material.[1]" The article subject does not meet these criteria. Sasata (talk) 17:19, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree and i agree with a part of your explication because you only notice some aspect of notability, you forgot the list by discipline, then If you look for chess you find that is not specified in wikipedia what is notability as a chess player, ( Only mention what kind of chess players have the right to be considered notables and d'ont mention FIDE Masters) but relies as a right to some subcategories for players including by nations and then you find FIDE Masters without elements to establish a definition of notability criteria for these cases but to hold the title, so the question here is what kind of notability we can refered when we d'ont have a precise definition? (simply d'ont mention) ok, now even if we transpole this specific case and try to apply by analogy of reason comparing with other sports there is not reason to delation when a person accomplish perfectably the criteria of 2 subcategories (FIDE Masters| by nations). In all case if the criteria to chess notability is to be Grand Master or participate in a chess olympiad then i agree with you. I attach the link here. Cheers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Chess_FIDE_Masters. Robertjor23 (talk 21:00 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe there are some others that need to be deleted. You mentioned Vladislav Tkachiev and Kamran Shirazi. The first is a grandmaster; the second is an international master, which is above a FM, but he may not be notable enough. But also you are arguing that Other stuff exists. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if you missunderstood my exemple, i only mentioned these players in order to demonstrate the meaning of multicultural player, i know perfectbly the title of both, please d'ont supose arguing stuff exists, i d'ont want to exemplify more, but you can read the biographies about chess players and the article that you nominate has completely normal criteria. Probably a lot of discussion for a not notable player no? Robertjor23 (talk 22:08 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * If you know any others that are not notable, please start an AfD for them. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 21:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not this kind of users! Every people whose are in the category chess players (FIDE, International and Grand masters by nations) have merit to be there because they are categorized (like in this case). D'ont ironize please with a bad presomption of affirmation to falls in basic sylogism. That is not the best way to defend your deletion motifs. If you see your comments after each answer you change the arguments about deletion in order to insist about your AfD nomination. Robertjor23 (talk 23:08 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Delete: Minor chess player with an ELO about as high as the top players at my local chess club. Doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria.--Atlan (talk) 22:50, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Move for a close. Consensus is clear. MaxBrowne (talk) 23:05, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.