Deletion of ICCF national member federations

Comment: True but they are not ''inherently'' unverifiable or original research. If he moves them to user space we don't have an urgent problem and we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Its not like we are salting these articles after all, he has the right to try and improve them. The author is encouraged to read these policies along with , all of which are reason for deletion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)

Comment: You are off to a better start now. First of all you need to stop putting your signature on the articles themselves. Second, they need some copyediting. oS is your friend. I still think you would be better off working on these in userspace rather than mainspace but as the articles improve that opinion might change. Happy editing
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mediation (WP:M)

Comment: the user is new and needs yet more time to learn about writing up articles and improve these ones, he is clearly serious and able to bing them up to standard. He is a valuable contributor in the general chess field and we must remember . Give him more time to sort it out. No consensus for now
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers (WP:BITE)