User talk:Ellipse0934

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 13:23, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

wikilinking
Wiki markup

would produce

--Pi zero (talk) 20:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Wesley So wins TATA Steel Chess
Published. Congrats! We need to work on documentation to streamline review for that type of article; part of the difficulty, I can see, is that I don't grok the patterns in chess (though I did once, briefly, enough to have a sense of the nature of what I'm not grokking now). --Pi zero (talk) 12:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I made a lot of errors regarding this which is why you had to waste time unnecessarily. This won't happen next time. I'll share some problems and thoughts.
 * I watched the live stream of the tournament and got familiar with many of the positions. I believe that live game analysis by grandmasters holds more weight than a post-game analysis with the help of a computer. Live analysis reflects the emotions of the game. I plan to give live analysis of games more weightage than post-game analysis in my future Chess articles.
 * There was a genuine problem with the "two pawns" statement. In the game analysis it became pretty clear that Wesley's central pawn was very powerful and Ian's passed pawn was pointless. In my mind it was as if there was a 2 pawn advantage which was not there. Oops..
 * I wasn't organised enough to write this. The first editions of the article were encyclopaedic in nature with tons of names and stats but nothing interesting. It was after the event finished that I realised that I should speak of the important games of the tournament. To do that I myself had to study multiple games multiple times. From next time I plan to write the article before the event finishes and only update scores and if required add about the last round. Is there some was that a reviewer can review the article a day before the event finishes and after I update the article for the final round the review only checks the updates?
 * Consider the statement "defend using his extra central pawn". In the game Wesley never uses the pawn, he just ends up protecting it. However, during the live analysis many somewhat reasonable variations were shown which trapped the Wesley's queen. That didn't happen because that extra central pawn was always there to protect to give Wesley enough conterplay. I just had a look and a great source to add would have been lifestream part 6 (https://livestream.com/chess/events/6877809/videos/148022477) which is 9 minutes long and most things could have been verified here. At 5:39 Wesley, "my pawn is preventing him from developing his kingside pieces", at 8:00 Wesley "My queen might get trapped" to which Yasser (commentator) agrees. I could also help a reviewer out in the future also by showing a side line, https://en.lichess.org/study/594jNCQj . A reviewer might not know much about chess and commentators will not speak of very obvious things which are true and a reasonable understanding of game concepts makes it obvious.
 * The live stream is hours long and they generally keep switching games which makes it tough to find comments. I will have to be smarter about this from next time.
 * Ellipse0934 (talk) 17:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)