Talk:Paul Morphy

message: I have acquired a copy of the 2010 edition of Lawson, and I am trying to use it to improve the citations in the article.
Other things being equal, a secondary source such as Lawson is a better reference than a tertiary source.  However, the first edition of Lawson, which was published in 1976, may have been harder to obtain when this article was first written than some tertiary sources.  So at that time, editors may have been tempted to cite tertiary sources, but now, Lawson should be routinely cited.
As detailed by Lawson on pages 226-7, the pamphlet by Buck about Morphy introduced a number of historical errors, which have been widely copied (even by Sergeant), and can be found in some of our tertiary sources; for example, as I write this, we are quoting some article that gave 1882 as the date of the incident in which Morphy's family tried to take him to the "Louisiana Retreat".  This is another reason to cite Lawson whenever possible. Bruce leverett (talk) 02:02, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working on the article 

message: Two different scores for a game played between Morphy and Löwenthal in 1850 have been published.  In one score, submitted by Ernest Morphy to various chess periodicals in 1856, Morphy won the game; in the other score, published by Löwenthal in his collection of Morphy's games in 1860, Morphy achieved a winning endgame but went astray and allowed a draw.
Sergeant (Sergeant 1957, pp. 210-212) uses the version published by Löwenthal. Lawson (Lawson 2010, pp. 21-32) discusses the discrepancy at length, strenuously arguing that Löwenthal's version must be incorrect, and referring to it as a "gross error", while implying that it may not have been just an error, but the result of outright dishonesty.  But Lawson apparently does not even consider the possibility that it might have been Ernest Morphy, not Löwenthal, who fudged the game score.
I have modified the article to take a neutral position between Sergeant and Lawson on this question, in accordance with WP:N. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:44, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Löwenthal game score issue 

message: I have organized the single table of results into several tables, while trying to verify entries against reliable sources.  I have removed entries about blindfold games and consultation games.  The following entries have been changed or removed:
:T. Ayers -- We were calling him "A.D. Ayers", presumably copied from chessgames.com.  The link indirected to an article mentioning a baseball umpire by that name of the 1870's.  Lawson identifies him only as "Dr. Ayers".  Edo identifies him as "T. Ayers"; I do not know which primary source, if any, they got that name from.
:Fiske, Fuller, and Perrin -- This was of course a consultation game.
:Jean Adolphe Laroche -- We were calling him "H. Laroche", and Lawson identifies him only as "Laroche" or "M. Laroche", but Edo identifies him as "J.A. Laroche", and chessgames.com has an entry for "Jean Adolphe Laroche" that aligns him with Lawson's references to Laroche.
:Chamouillet -- This was a blindfold consultation game (mentioned by Edge).
:St. Amant -- The only known game is a consultation game.
:De Riviere and Journoud -- A consultation game.
:Bousserolles -- A blindfold game.
:Schrüfer -- I have corrected the spelling by adding an umlaut, and by spelling his first name.  Sergeant does not give his full name, only quoting a source that calls him "S---r", but chessgames.com identifies him as Schrüfer.
:George Hammond, 1859 -- this was a consultation game.
:Augustus Mongredien, 1863 -- Lawson says that Morphy played games with Mongredien in Paris in 1863, but I cannot find a source for the results and/or scores.
:(added later:)
:Löwenthal, 1859 -- We were giving a score of 1 win, 1 loss, and 2 draws, but I do not see any source that gives that score; I have gone with 1 win, 1 loss, and 1 draw.
:Arnous de Rivière, 1863 -- We were giving a score of 9-3, but Edo scorns this in favor of 13-5.  The games presented in Sergeant are 9 wins and 2 losses.
I have avoided using the term "casual".  Nowadays this means any game not played for stakes or played in a tournament or formal match.  But in Morphy's day, tournaments were not common.  Games serious enough to warrant keeping score, and publishing the score in a magazine, were played in settings that we would now call "casual". Bruce leverett (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tables of results 

message: We are quoting Euwe saying that Morphy was "... a chessgenius in the complete sense of the word."  However, we aren't citing Euwe directly, but are citing him as quoted by Valery Beim.  I would like to find the original source of this quotation -- perhaps it is in Euwe's book "The Development of Chess Style"?  It would be better to cite something by Euwe than to cite somebody else quoting Euwe, because one could be sure that Euwe's words were correctly quoted, and one would have a publication date and other context. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I see from re-reading Beim that he cites a 1937 issue of the Soviet periodical 64 to quote Euwe.  As a practical matter, this may not be easily accessible to readers, so it would be OK that we are citing Beim instead. Bruce leverett (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Euwe on Morphy