Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish chess players (2nd nomination)


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure)  Eostrix  (&#x1F989; hoot hoot&#x1F989;) 13:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

List of Jewish chess players
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

This page was nominated for deletion and the community voted to delete it in 2005. (It's possible it was recreated.) Regardless it should be removed. Sukey (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator - Being that organizations such as the Jewish Virtual Library publish and maintain online lists of Jewish people in various professions and areas of life this list is defensible. Sukey (talk) 01:09, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sukey (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - as the article explains, the overlap between Judaism and chess has received substantial coverage in the academic literature. Therefore, the reasoning in the previous discussion is incorrect. Since no other rationale has been presented, the list ought to be kept. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep unless the nom (or another interested party) can impeach all but one of the books listed in the last paragraph of the lede with titles directly relating to the topic at hand. That is, based on what's already in the article, the list topic, the intersection of Jews and chess, meets GNG. Jclemens (talk) 01:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:NLIST says that "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." The article, as it exists, provides all of the necessary references that show that the subject is backed by independent reliable sources. The arguments made more than 15 years ago at the original AfD simply don't fly. Alansohn (talk) 02:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep this is an exceptionally well-sourced list. Mccapra (talk) 04:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , the fact that a different article with the same title was deleted 16 years ago is not a valid reason to wish to delete this one. What is your reasoning for why it should be deleted regardless? P-K3 (talk) 11:38, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Notable well-sourced list, and there is no WP:DELREASON --Kemalcan (talk) 13:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:OCEGRS states "people should only be categorized by ethnicity or religion if this has significant bearing on their career. For instance, in sports, a Roman Catholic athlete is not treated differently from a Lutheran or Methodist" and uses Jewish Mathematicians as an example. Sukey (talk) 23:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) This is a list, not a category. 2) The combination is "a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right", as explained above. 3) You've inadvertently !voted a second time. Would you please change "delete" to "nominator's comment" or something like that? Thank you. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:EXEMPT1E that states "These principles apply equally to lists" The issue with this list is that it has the potential to be dangerous for anyone on it who is living. If someone wants to go through it and remove all the living players included in the list and add a BLP header at the top of the page that would remove the safety concern but doesn't address whether any of the deceased included in the list would have wanted to be included (e.g. Bobby Fischer). It's surprising nobody else has an issue with this, particularly considering Wikipedia guidelines for BLPs. Sukey (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It doesn't really matter whether players "would have wanted to be included", especially if they are deceased. If their are reliable sources saying that they are jewish, there is no reason for them not to be listed as such. Now I'm not an expert on BLPs, but you can certainly list their religion. bop34 • talk • contribs 18:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: Per above, and per my reply to . Also, the list clearly makes sense to have, as shown by "The topic of Jewish participation in chess is discussed extensively in academic and popular literature.", "Although Jews make up less than 0.2% of the world's population, of the first 13 undisputed world champions, over 50% were Jewish, including the first two." bop34 • talk • contribs 18:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I skimmed through the article, checked the uncited Joshua Waitzkin. There in nothing in his article about him being Jewish, apart from categories and a link to this article. As I understand it, this is not ok in WP-land. Also, the article (List of Jewish chess players) use JInfo.org as ref a lot, which doesn't seem obviously WP-good, especially not for living people. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment PrimeHunter pointed out in the Tea House that the Jewish Virtual Library maintains similar lists so I will withdraw my nomination (and keep a watch on the page in case anyone else nominates it in the future). I'll follow up on the issues you found. (Didn't want you to feel your comment was disregarded when I withdraw this.) Sukey (talk) 01:06, 3 April 2021 (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.