Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Internet Correspondence Games Server


 * 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. joe deckertalk to me 17:18, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Free Internet Correspondence Games Server

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Website of questionable notability. Google news search shows zero results. Standard search shows primary and unreliable sources, directory links, and social media mentions, but no significant coverage found from independent reliable sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with my article. FICGS does get google search results. I also updated my sources with independent pages. Such article does exist in the Italian wikipedia and there is no complaint there.

This article should not be deleted for lack of asserted importance because the article is about new correspondence chess organization. FICGS is responsible for organizing correspondence chess championship similar to the ICCF World Correspondence Chess Championship. I am not affiliate with FICGS by any means.

I want to mention that similar article is written in Italian and my article is the English version. The Italian article is accepted, the English version should be accepted too. FICGS is hosting World Championship tournament which is the second most important event in the world of correspondence chess after the ICCF World Correspondence Chess Championship. The last 3 FICGS events were won by ICCF and FIDE recognized chess grandmasters - Edward Kotlyanskiy and Eros Riccio. This article gives information about correspondence chess. FICGS is mentioned in the main article Correspondence chess and I think it deserves place in wikipedia.

There are several other articles mentioning FICGS like Eros Riccio and Edward Kotlyanskiy. Both players are recognized as FICGS champions by Chessbase. Chessbase Correspondence Chess Database 2010 and 2011 includes correspondence chess games, played in FICGS by international masters and grandmasters, recognized by ICCF and FIDE.

I think the articles serves a purpose to inform about new possibilities like playing advanced chess, invented by Garry Kasparov and also giving information about international correspondence chess event, recognized by Chessbase and other Correspondence database creators. Without this article the information in the main article Correspondence chess and the articles Eros Riccio and Edward Kotlyanskiy is incomplete.

Therefore I think the article shouldn't be deleted. I as the author of the article am open to suggestions about improving the quality of my article. Dimvass (talk) 20:08, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - if it is a new organisation, as suggests, then that may explain the purported issues regarding notability. - Sitush (talk) 20:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - if it's a new organization, even if it's notable, has it established that notability in a verifiable way? - Jorgath (talk) 18:16, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I've renamed it FICGS (Free Internet Correspondence Games Server), but I have no opinion about notability .  DGG ( talk ) 21:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:06, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:08, 28 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I have added several additional links and references about FICGS. I think there is no valid reason for deleting the article. Dimvass (talk) 21:05, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 15:31, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  20:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't think notability has been established via significant coverage from independent reliable sources. I don't think Edward Kotlyanskiy meets the notability bar for a chess player either (but that's a separate matter). Sasata (talk) 14:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Sasata (talk) - You are just copy/pasting. You haven't proved any of your statements. Your opinion is biased and irrelevant. Dimvass (talk) 19:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * How is my opinion biased and irrelevant? Because it does not conform to what you think? The onus is on you to show that the subject of the article meets notability standards through "coverage found from independent reliable sources" (another copy/paste). You have not done so in your blurb above. Sasata (talk) 19:10, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment You haven't proved anything. There is such article in Italian. Noone on the Italian wikipedia has problem with it! Dimvass (talk) 19:21, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What does that have to do with anything? This is the English Wikipedia. If you want the article to remain here, you need to prove "notability standards through coverage found from independent reliable sources". If you can't, the article will be deleted. I suggest trying to find sources to meet this requirement would be a more useful pursuit than pointless bickering with me. Sasata (talk) 19:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * strong delete fails WP: GNG complete lack of third party coverage. Note is a single purpose editor. LibStar (talk) 02:25, 16 March 2012 (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.