Talk:List of female chess players

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on List of female chess players. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050918024008/http://chess.about.com/library/weekly/aa05b12.htm to http://chess.about.com/library/weekly/aa05b12.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:43, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Susan Polgar is regarded as the first woman to achieve the GM title in the traditional way, while Gaprindashvili and Chiburdanidze won their title by winning the Women's World Championship (WCC), according to this source, on which the list of female GM is primarly based. But looking carefully, this is actually quite nonsense: Gaprindashvili lost her world title in 1978! (I corrected the way she get the GM title, according to the info in her page) And I read somewhere that in the past the winner of the WWC got the "male" IM title and I strongly suspect that the practice of awarding the Women's World Champion the GM title started with the KO championships. Xie Jun, according to OlimpBase, appeared in the FIDE rating list as an IM in 1992 and a GM for the first time in 1993 — and not 1995 as the abovementioned source claims (this should tell you how reliable actually it is...) — so 2 years after she won the WWC! Maybe Chiburdanidze is actually the first woman who earned the GM title in the traditional way, because I find rather odd that FIDE awards her the GM title at her third (!) WWC match victory, but awards "only" the IM title to Xie Jun. Sophia91 (talk) 06:16, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chiburdanidze, Polgar, Xie Jun  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of female chess players. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927003744/http://www.ajedrezcampeonatomundial2005.com/home.asp?lang=en&op=jug&id=3 to http://www.ajedrezcampeonatomundial2005.com/home.asp?lang=en&op=jug&id=3
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed this comment from the article again:
:Note that even those titles earned by "norms" need not have been achieved on a gender-neutral basis; e.g. Hou Yifan gained one of her three GM norms by reaching the final of the Women's World Chess Championship 2008.)
This requires a reference to show that it is relevant in this context.  Without a such a reference it falls afoul of WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH, WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE.  Articles can't "note" such things in an encyclopedic editorial voice without a citation.  If someone has actually noted this, it can be cited and the article and specifically ascribed to that person: "So-and-so has noted that ..."  Quale (talk) 04:21, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The official reference that Hou Yifan gained her third GM norm in the WWCC is given in her article:  I'll gladly add it here as well, and  remove the "Note that" part if that's what bothers you about the comment. Otherwise, if it's relevant that "Susan Polgar became the first woman to earn the Grandmaster title on the same basis as the men, by earning Grandmaster norms", then why isn't it relevant to mention that Hou Yifan did not earn hers on the same basis as men, although the table just says "norms" for both? (BTW, talking of references, all post-2004 entries in the "Earned" column are currently unsourced, including Hou Yifan's.) --Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Susan Polgar has herself made the claim that she was the first woman to earn the GM title with tournament norms on the same basis as men.  That gives it some noteworthiness, but like all claims in Wikipedia it needs to be verifiable.  If it can't be verified, the claim should be removed from this article.  Sourcing for the article can and certainly should be improved, but do you think any of the information in the table is not correct?  I think the table entry for Hou Yifan is essentially correct, although ratings.fide.com says she became a GM in 2009 and the table says 2008.  It's a little unclear how the title date is determined.  Often I think the date the final norm was earned is used, but I believe FIDE records the date that the title was ratified by a FIDE conference. I think those conferences only happen two to four times a year, so the official title can be issued several months after the title requirements were fulfilled.  (The date of the final norm is always used when computing the player's age when the GM title is earned, which is relevant to the claim that Hou was the youngest woman to become a GM.)  Anyway, do you have a reliable source that says that Hou Yifan did not earn the GM title on the same basis as men?  I'm not talking about your WP:SYNTH assembled from sources that don't say anything about how men earn GM titles, I mean a WP:RS source that makes a point of this comparison saying that it is something important we should note about Hou.  The Women's World Champion earns the GM title automatically as do the World U20 and >65, so I don't share your belief that this is a Very Important Truth That Must Be Told.  Quale (talk) 05:38, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that saying "note that" (see what I did there?) is WP:EDITORIALIZING, and is specifically discouraged by the Manual of Style. MaxBrowne (talk) 10:01, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editorializing violates Wikipedia guidelines 

message: I propose to delete the columns "Earned" and "Peak rating". The vast majority earned the title by scoring norms+2500 rating, as to those who earned by winning the Women's World Championship or through "special ways", "WWC" and "special" can be added to the "Notes" column (currently empty apart from 3 players). The peak rating requires frequent updates, and anyway the peak rating of each player if just one click away. Sophia91 (talk) 13:44, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Your proposal makes sense to me. Cobblet (talk) 17:22, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

text: Yes, please do this. Gaprindashvili and Chiburdanidze earned their titles through norms, so the designation "special" in the "earned" column is just vaporous.  Bruce leverett (talk) 19:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  GMs: "Earned" and "Peak rating" columns 

message: I guess that since it's a major US holiday, in the middle of a huge pandemic, people are sitting at home with time on their hands and nothing to do but make random edits to Wikipedia.
Since the title of the article is "List of female chess players", anything important in it that isn't a list of female chess players is misplaced -- readers will not find it.  If Wikipedia needs a "Timeline of women in chess", or a "History of women in chess", the right thing to do is to create an article by that name, not hide the material in an article by another name.
I am inclined to just blow away the whole "Timeline", but I will pause for a while, to enable other editors to make helpful suggestions.  Bruce leverett (talk) 03:33, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The Queen's Gambit (miniseries) might also be a reason for the attention. Wikipedia could certainly use an article on women in chess. Cobblet (talk) 04:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I had some questions about this possibility, but it looks like WP:SPLIT is where to look for answers.  Bruce leverett (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right that that section doesn't belong in this list article, but as you say could be a seed that might sprout into a different article on women in chess.  Up to a few years ago I probably would have jumped on this immediately, with the feeling that this is the kind of not right thing that should be corrected right away.  Now I'm content to leave some things alone for a while if they seem fixable even if they aren't quite right, to give them time to develop a bit.  (Many things should be corrected right away, including false material and BLP problems, but this material seems mostly good, it's just in the wrong place.)  In another week or two we can try to transplant the timeline into a more suitable article, unless someone else does it first.  Quale (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I would not have waited as long as I have to formally start a Split discussion, but I've been busy, that's my excuse.  Bruce leverett (talk) 15:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline of women in chess 

message: I rather miss this.  Having it at the head of this article seemed like a bit of harmless fun.  I will restore it, but will abide by consensus, if it goes the other way.  Bruce leverett (talk) 01:36, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I see that the painting is not gone, it's just moved over to Women in chess.  Good enough, thanks!  Bruce leverett (talk) 01:40, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Painting by Mowbray 

message: Thanks for suggesting that this should be discussed on the talk page.
There are three lists here, not just one, and before each list, there is a short explanation of its scope and other issues.  Prior to the first list, the short explanation is, "This article lists female chess players that received official FIDE titles or are otherwise renowned."  The three short explanations together constitute the introduction as specified by MOS:LISTINTRO.
Through late November of 2020, the lead section of this list consisted of that single sentence, followed by a short section entitled "History of Women playing chess".  That short section was extraneous, inasmuch as the title of the article did not suggest any connection with the history of women in chess, and the content of that section did little or nothing to augment the list.  I would not presume to say why this extraneous material was tolerated, but simple neglect may have played a role.
Two things happened after late November of 2020:  some editors greatly enlarged the extraneous section; and another editor created a new article, "Women in chess".  The new article did not initially include any material on the history of women in chess, but I propose that it would be quite logical and reasonable to put historical material in the new article.  I note, however, that historical material in the new article would not necessarily be copied from the history section of this article, but would be integrated seamlessly into the new article.
I do not think the present, enlarged, history section of this article is anything to write home about, but one could consider keeping it in place until more historical material is added to the new article, if that does not cause even worse problems.  Bruce leverett (talk) 04:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It was better before when it was just a short summary rather than an uninformative Bill Wall-style timeline with little context. I'll at least get rid of one egregiously bad source. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 21:01, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: see the subject Thewriter006 (talk) 02:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Deceased players noted by † symbol.' shall we omit saying that all female GMs are alive? 

message: Another editor has pointed out that :Category:Chess woman grandmasters has many more links to articles about WGM's than this list, List of female chess players, has links to any women chess players at all.  I suppose that means that this list is not being maintained as well as that category. What do you know. Bruce leverett (talk) 04:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Bruce, I think at least we should put a (fairly prominent) non-pro-user friendly link on this page to the Category:Chess woman grandmasters page. (Currently the link can be found without description at the bottom under See Also, which doesn't imply that it's a Far More Examples Here page.) Speaking from my own non-pro user experience, I found this page very easily, whereas even using the Search bar I didn't find the Category page. I was left wondering why Wikipedia's information was so incomplete, or whether there was some unstated qualification filter being used that resulted in many other female "people who are primarily known as chess players" not being granted a presence here. When I finally did stumble on the Category page (did I mention I'm not a pro user?) my wonderment then changed to "why is this good information so deeply hidden, when it's actually all here?" Ranger86 (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This list is short 

message: I find it fairly easy to understand GM, IM, WGM, WIM, based on other info on this and other pages. But what is a WFM? Woman Female Master? Woman FIDE Master? I can think of nothing even slightly plausible that is not internally redundant. And it's also possible that non-chess-fan readers might stumble on WIM, for example. Ranger86 (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So actually I find the information on the previously hard to find Category:Chess woman grandmasters page. 'Woman FIDE Master' it is—which seems silly to me. Why not WM? It's not WFGM or WFIM, after all. Ranger86 (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, acronyms should be introduced when they are first mentioned. Greenman (talk) 22:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

text: WFM corresponds to FM as WGM corresponds to GM. But I agree that this should be explained. Bruce leverett (talk) 02:32, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descriptions for acronyms important?