Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tata Steel Chess Tournament 2020


 * 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 keep particularly given the sources provided by Pawnkingthree and potential for expansion of what the consensus views to be a notable subject. —&#8239; The Earwig (talk) 05:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Tata Steel Chess Tournament 2020

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The tournament itself is notable, but which policy justifies having a dedicated, stand alone page for the list of participants and results? This article seems to fail WP:GNG. Dutch wiki page is no better. Ditto for other entries at Template:Tata Steel Chess Tournament. Existence of such 'sport statistics' referenced solely to the some database or official, non-indepent sources is a major problem. Shouldn't this all be merged to the main article, or maybe to some list? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  05:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:28, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

, who also participated in a similar discussion here. Natg 19 (talk) 18:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Kasparov described the 1999 edition of this tournament as "by far the best tournament in my life", see Hoogovens Wijk aan Zee Chess Tournament 1999. That quote, and a visual reflection of his game against Topalov in that tournament, would have gone unnoticed if there hadn't been a separate article on the 1999 edition of this event. The main argument is therefore: to give more in-depth knowledge about this tournament. The second reason is that the main article (Tata Steel Chess Tournament) was getting too crowded, with 80% of the article consisting of crosstables (still visible in the article, as 2002-2018 have not been separated yet). Moreover (3): the (now 20) articles per year have just started, and could be expanded with examples from striking matches, photographs, diagrams etc. Fourth argument: separate articles on chess tournaments per year are not uncommon on Wiki: Zürich 1934 chess tournament & 1953; Vienna 1908 chess tournament & 3 other years; Carlsbad 1929 chess tournament & 3 o.; London 1899 chess tournament a.o., just to name a few). Vysotsky (talk) 08:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a classic argument not to use... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Surely the policy (well, guideline) is WP:DETAIL. There have been 82 editions of this tournament, it would not be practical to attempt to cover all of them at the main article. This is a valid subarticle. This is one of the most notable chess tournaments and there is certainly enough coverage each year to meet GNG. Wijk aan Zee is the "Chess Wimbledon"; we wouldn't expect the tennis version to contain details of each tournament at its main article.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , "there is certainly enough coverage each year to meet GNG". Great. Can you show which sources contain such coverage? None have been presented here nor added to the article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm still mystified as why you chose to nominate a recent edition the most prominent tournament on the chess calendar for deletion.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , The first ref doesn't mention this tournament at all. Do the others? If your first ref is irrelevant to the topic, why should I spend my time checking others? But I checked the second one. It discusses "Tata Steel Masters 2020" not "Tata Steel Chess Tournament 2020". Is it the same entity? Ditto for source three, which mentions " 82nd Tata Steel Tournament". At best, this is such a niche event that sources can't even agree on the right name. And nobody added any refs to the article. All this indignation about "it's obviously notable", yet sources to support this claim are still at zero. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course the first ref is relevant. "Tata Steel Wijk aan Zee" is an alternate name for the tournament (like how the All England Tennis Championships is also known as Wimbledon) as you would know if you had done the simplest of WP:BEFORE searches, as you are required to do. P-K3 (talk) 11:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is detailed and would make a great subarticle. Cupcake547Let's chat! 17:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC).
 * , It's just a table, not an article, sub or anything. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I meant a table, but it's still detailed and I would still keep it. Cupcake547Let's chat! 14:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC).
 * I would keep it also because it is very notable as an event. Cupcake547Let's chat! 20:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC).
 * Snow keep. Extremely notable under the WP:GNG! Please stop making this daily round, AfDing regular, notable topics for deletion, then arguing under the opinion of each and every person who disagrees with you. It creates unnecessary havoc and distraction from constructive WP work. Create an AfD only when you have a strong case, not to ask a policy question! Positively put, kudos to hewiki and to User:Yoavd for creating an in-depth discussion of this and all other chess topics! The enwiki article can be expanded using the hewiki example. gidonb (talk) 11:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: failure to do a WP:BEFORE here. See above for sources, and a Google News search within the date range of 2020 shows waves of Chessbase, Chess.com and Chess24 coverage—more than enough to justify the reasonable-length table listings currently in the article. — Bilorv ( talk ) 00:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. --Yoavd (talk) 04:41, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge to Tata Steel Chess Tournament. Though this may be a notable chess event, I don't believe that this year's tournament (and the others in the template) need to have their own articles, as they are "routine" yearly super tournaments. There is nothing about this year's tournament that was specifically notable and the crosstable of the players can be merged back into the main article (unless an event was particularly notable in the Chess world or wider world). Alternatively, since users are concerned about the size of the main article, there can be a list article of the results of the tournaments, List of winners of the Tata Steel Chess Tournament. Natg 19 (talk) 18:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with . The article is very unclear when you put all the tables on one page. It could be an option to tell more about the background from this tournament edition. Sneeuwvlakte (talk) 09:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I do think their is potential for this article to expand and with the references that has been given by . Basically what I am saying here, is to expand and not delete here. HawkAussie (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:BEFORE is been missed by the nominator. Sonofstar (talk) 18:23, 17 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.