Jump to content

Talk:List of Jewish chess players

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Herr chagall (talk | contribs) at 23:03, 13 December 2020 (→Half-Jewish). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

AfD

Note: and article with this name was deleted as a result of this AfD in 2005. Rich Farmbrough, 23:54, 8 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Publishers

Google books - are they really the publishers when they provide an online image of a physical book? Rich Farmbrough, 23:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

No, they're not. Jayjg (talk) 01:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy G4

This is a split of another article, not a re-insertion of the material previously deleted here, although there may be commonality. AfD would be sensible if deletion is proposed. Rich Farmbrough, 15:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

NPOV Introduction

The introduction is currently a list of books including one "book" twice under different titles. There is already a book list at the bottom of the page. Adjectives should be minimised such as extensively. The introduction would be better to cover the rationale for players being in the list. Perhaps something like this would be a better balance:

There have been many great Jewish chess players in History including the first chess world champion Wilhelm Steinitz #ref. Jewish chess players have also been influential in the development of chess theory such as Hypermodernism#ref. The Museum of Jewish Heritage is developing a special gallery dedicated to Jews in sport and chess including Garry Kasparov, Mikhail Tal, and Judith Polgar.#ref

According to Harold U. Ribalow in his book "The Great Jewish Chess Champions" a Jewish chess player is "???" #ref. The players listed below meet the following criteria... Tetron76 (talk) 09:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If a book appears twice, feel free to point out which it is (if it is in fact the same book). It should if that is the case be deleted in one instance. I disagree as to whether the intro is appropriate -- it certainly is. I recognize that Tetron had an animus against reflecting the cat of Jews, as reflected here. As reflected at that discussion, Tetron's anti-list-of-Jewish players animus is not a consensus view, and there is no need for it to be reflected here with censorship. Also, no reason to reflect the anti-Jewish-list/cat animus by tag-bombing the article w/a non-consensus view as the basis. Finally, there is nothing whatsoever that supports the POV claim above.--Epeefleche (talk) 12:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
it is not censorship, I did not tag the entire list as POV. I think there should be an introduction and I suggested a manner that would allow this to happen. Listing all the books you can find on the subject doesn't make an introduction. You need to indicate the information from the books or otherwise they are references. As discussed in the CfD History, Jews and Chess and Chess in Jewish History and Hebrew Literature are both the same dissertation. It should also be noted that Oxford Academia Publishers is clearly a dubious publisher. It is a mistake to blend RS with questionable sources. My objection to the use of extensively because there is not actually the evidence to support this as being extensive by scientific standards where you commonly get works with citations in the 100s and 1000s.Tetron76 (talk) 14:45, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is an introduction. There is no POV issue. The para you refer to is w/regard to the coverage of the topic of the list in various books, per se. It is on-point and relevant. It is notable, to me at least, that you jumped from seeking to delete the cat, where your effort and thinking was demonstrably non-consensus, to tag-bombing the article. I can think of one other editor tries that approach, but it is not an appropriate one. When you say the two books are the same dissertation, are you saying they are the same book, with the same ISBN? Also, the book that you attack is certainly a source for the fact that it exists and that it covers what the intro says it covers -- there is absolutely no RS issue there (not that I agree with your "dubious" comment in any event).--Epeefleche (talk) 14:57, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will leave this alone but you are wrong on both counts. I only tagged this page following on from the latest edit. I don't know if you have read all of the books that you are placing in the list but you get an ISBN for self published books too. But when you repeatedly include bad sources it generates the impression that other sources are of the same ilk. Your reasonable sources such as The Great Jewish chess Players (found complete version) and can I play chess on the Sabbha (seen only first 54 pages doesn't start on chess until page 54) are diminished by including bad sources with them. The inclusion of a book on stamps also makes it look like the information is not there to support your case. Yet there is probably enough information to warrant this list but it has to be presented in an encyclopedic manner. The easiest way to do this is to show in the introduction how inclusion is being decided, or by stating what the sources think is meant by the term Jewish chess player.Tetron76 (talk) 17:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt Bobby Fischer would have liked to be included.

In the end this is a question of faith.

And if everyone should be free to believe in what one suits best, one is surely free to clearly state that he doesn't want to be included. Fischer's stance about being called Jewish is very well known. - Is the list maintainer the one to tell a dead person that person's faith? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.136.55 (talk) 08:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wtf Bobby Fischer would hate the man that mad ethis list. He was a convinced national socialist. Who cares if he had a jewish mother he still hated judaism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.195.55 (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnically Jewish by genealogical lineage is key here. Not religious belief. Bobby Fischer's genes don't care what he would have liked. His parents were two Jews. I hope this settles your concern. It is not misinformation; check up Wikipedia's entry on on him in the section about Paul Nemenyi as Fischer's father. I think you will need to stop the foul language and come to terms with this. Thank you for allowing me to talk. S. Kossin (talk) 03:32, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


List of Jewish Chess Players: Not a question Faith but genealogical ETHNICITY. Most Jews are not observant; many are atheists. Faith is not what people want to know when asking if Fischer was a Jew. (This is a reply to the first comment.) S. Kossin (talk) 03:38, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Half-Jewish

A very big portion of this list includes people who are only partially Jewish,like Kasparov and Fischer. Why doesnt the article mention this under there names? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.3.79 (talk) 01:50, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One can be (fully) Jewish with only one Jewish parent.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:01, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see any problems using the term "Half-Jewish". Garry Kasparov uses it regularly refering to his own ethnicity. See for example the transcript of a radio interview made by ABC News (Australia) April 3, 2005. Interviewer Monica Attard comments about his non Russian roots:
- Attard: Well you were born in Azerbaijan as I understand it.
- Kasparov: Yes I am born in Baku and I am half Armenian-half Jewish but my native tongue is Russian, my culture is Russian, my education is Russian… (http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1335618.htm) JanolovLindgren (talk) 00:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
One can be fully Jewish with only one Jewish parent, as mentioned. Many people are. They may be of half-Jewish-heritage-as-measured-by-having-one-Jewish-parent, and at the same time be fully Jewish. It may be considered a familial category, which reflects multiple heritages, but typically has no religious meaning. --Epeefleche (talk) 01:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Who has the right or not to call himself fully jewish may be very interesting but it's not what I'm discussing. In my opinion a person with relatively far off jewish ancestors could be entitled to call himself fully jewish. That's not the issue. In the case of Kasparov he's obviously refering to his own ethnicity as half-jewish, so what's the big problem of using that designation here? JanolovLindgren (talk) 02:18, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To make the whole issue crystal clear (to avoid misunderstandings) maybe it would be a good idea to rename the list: "List of chess players of jewish or part-jewish descent" (or at least make a note about it in the article). That is unless this is some sort of a political issue, in which case I can fully understand that clarification is not a top priority. JanolovLindgren (talk) 03:28, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "List of chess players of jewish or part-jewish descent" - good suggestion. The only real reason I can see for not doing this clarification is the argument commonly invoked from a more strict internal Jewish perspective, that you can't be partly jewish. Either you are Jewish or you are not. From that perspective, the only way to be counted as Jewish is to be a convert or to be born to a Jewish mother. But if that is the case then Kasparov isn't Jewish at all. ArieKaufman (talk) 11:08, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're asking for trouble if you rename the list with the qualifier "or part-jewish" or if you attempt to clarify everyone in the list. The lists of "African-Americans" do not qualify that it includes those who are also part-black. A better solution to this issue might be what they do on the article List of African-American writers which is to include a link to the African American article by way of: "Note: Consult Who is African-American? to gain a better sense as to who can be listed as an African-American writer." In other words, add this to the article: "Note: Consult Who is Jewish? to gain a better sense as to who can be listed as a Jewish chess player." BashBrannigan (talk) 02:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to make a correction. Someone here referred to Fischer as half-Jewish. Evidence published in 2009 has shown that Bobby Fischer was born to two Jews. Research done by the FBI in the Soviet era concluded that his true biological father was Paul Nemenyi, a hungarian Jew. Fiscer was aware of who his true father was but didn't want to publicize this. Both of his parents were Jews so he is fully Jewish Ethnically. (All of this information is found in the related articles referenced in Wikipedia's entry on Bobby Fischer.) S. Kossin (talk) 03:23, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnically, Robson Fischer was half-Hungarian, half-Polish. As he didn’t accept his parents’ denomination, technically, he was fully non-Jewish, his anti-semitism aside.-esse quam videri - to be rather than to seem (talk) 23:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kasparov

Inevitably, people who can't cope with reality try to deny Kasparov's ethnicity. Kasparov has never repudiated his Jewish ethnicity, so the statement "to regard Kasparov as Jewish when he has publicly claimed the opposite" is irrelevant and erroneous. Spare WP from your POV pushing. Toccata quarta (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

False: see transcript of interview here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301057,00.html, where Kasparov denies being Jewish and states his religion as Christianity. Furthermore, even without this smoking gun, to state Kasparov as Jewish is simply bigoted: it denies the fact that one half of Kasparov's parental lineage (his mother) is not Jewish, implying that Jewish ethnicity, which has itself been deluded with European ethnicity admixture from its original Middle Eastern origins, is dominant over other ethnicities. This is racism, pure and simple. It is completely relevant, in such circumstances, to hear what ethnicity the individual in question considers him or herself to be, but even if this is put aside, Kasparov is at best half-Jewish, not Jewish. I can't really be any clearer- if a Swede and a Chinese produced a child, would that child be ethnically completely Swedish or completely Chinese? Neither- they would be half-Chinese and half-Swedish. To state Kasparov is Jewish outright is false and misleading. Therefore, if you would like to edit the article to be more accurately reflective of the reality, be my guest. Randomocity999 (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Religion does not "=" ethnicity. Which part of that do you not understand? As for the rest of what you write, see WP:RS and WP:PSTS. You have some reading to do.
Also, the article did not claim "outright" that Kasparov is Jewish; instead, it made mention of his mother's ethnicity (Armenian). Despite that, you are consistently willing to use the word "false". Toccata quarta (talk) 20:46, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, see section above this one- the same concern is voiced by another editor. To claim one is completely Jewish ethnically, when they are ethnically only half-Jewish (and even less than that because the parent that was supposedly full Jewish has had European admixture, so ethnically they themselves are likely not even full Jewish), is misleading and bigoted.Randomocity999 (talk) 20:38, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for WP:OR-ish lecture, but I'm afraid you should read WP:RS as soon as possible. Toccata quarta (talk) 20:46, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No one stated religion is equal to ethnicity- show me where I've stated that religion equals ethnicity? Do you have a basic reading comprehension problem? In the transcript cited, Kasparov denied being Jewish independently of religion, and then denied being Jewish in reference to religion: you stated he did not make such a denial, therefore you are incorrect. Secondly, your attempt to divert the argument by pretending to the throne of authority with irrelevant Wikipedia policy links will not work; there is no original research to the fact that Kasparov's parentage is only half-Jewish, and therefore to claim that he is Jewish, when he has publicly denied being so, is bigoted and misleading. So "spare me" your "POV" accusations- by your logic here, having one Jewish parent makes the ethno-religious identity of the other irrelevant, unless of course the offspring does something "terrible", in which case the identity shifts over to the non-Jewish parent. You think you can play this game in the dark? Take a multicultural class sweety. Awaiting response Randomocity999 (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The word 'false' is perfectly appropriate here for the presentation of Kasparov's Jewishness in the article is indeed just that: false. Kasparov is listed as being Jewish in several places, including a picture of him and an introductory quote that makes absolutely no mention of Kasparov being "half-Jewish". Therefore, your attempt to argue that the article was not misleading in the first place fails. Secondly, I appreciate the fact that you enjoyed my lecture- it appears that you needed it given your complete lack of logical rigor in handling this issue. There is no "original research" in claiming that a person with half-Jewish parentage is not ethnically full Jewish, which is what the article implies. What else would you like me to spell out for you? Randomocity999 (talk) 20:55, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP policy links are most definitely not "irrelevant". As for the word "sweety", see WP:NPA, unless you wish to visit WP:ANI soon. I have already made my points, and agree with Epeefleche. Toccata quarta (talk) 21:20, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relax sweety- no threats are necessary. And your policy links are irrelevant in this circumstance since nothing I've stated in the substantive argument violates any of the policies you've cited. Your attempt at diverting the argument therefore fails, sweety. Randomocity999 (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not arguing that, Epeefleche. I'm arguing that ethnically, Kasparov is not full Jewish, which is what the article implies (or did imply before I changed it). Religiously, there is no question that Kasparov is not Jewish. Randomocity999 (talk) 21:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I stand by what I said. Jews are an ethnicity, a religion, and a nation. On balance, I agree with Toccata.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:09, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing you said contradicts my argument; Kasparov is not Jewish by religion (see source above in this section); he is not full Jewish by ethnicity; he is not nationally Jewish either. Therefore, your comments are irrelevant to the argument at hand, not to mention potentially bigoted since they imply a favor of Jewish ethnic dominance over other ethnicities. I would reconsider "standing by" this kind of bigotry. Randomocity999 (talk) 21:29, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with you. As do the refs.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:32, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You disagree with me; the refs do not- as I cited above, Kasparov is not religiously or nationally Jewish, and he is only half ethnically Jewish (actually, considering the admixture of European genetics to the original Jewish ethnicity, he is technically less than half). Randomocity999 (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Epeefleche. You must be joking. Aren't you? If I write an article with the header "English Pop Musicians" I don't write: "... one very famous musician is the English Paul McCartney" It sounds extremely stupid. If you mention Garry Kasparov on a page entitled "List of Jewish chess players" it seems really weird to write "the Jewish Garry Kasparov". What is that supposed to mean? Are there other Garry Kasparovs? Have you heard about The Jewish Dr Phil? - Shmuley Boteach. Have you heard about the the Jewish Elvis? - Niel Diamond. It would also be good to clarify what the list is all about by renaming it: "List of chess players of jewish or part-jewish descent". Then everything would make sense. That would also solve the problem put forth by Random999 that Kasparov is neither Jewish by Religion nor by nationality. Ethnically he calls himself half-jewish. JanolovLindgren (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Epeefleche. Renaming the list to "List of chess players of jewish or part-jewish descent" would make perfect sense and solve the problem with Kasparovs and others ethnical identity. As I said above: The only real reason I can see for not doing this clarification is the argument commonly invoked from a more strict internal Jewish perspective, that you can't be partly jewish. Either you are Jewish or you are not. From that perspective, the only way to be counted as Jewish is to be a convert or to be born to a Jewish mother. But if that is the case then Kasparov isn't Jewish at all. ArieKaufman (talk) 20:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Why is this irrelevant article up if it was voted "delete" in 2005. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.29.166.18 (talk) 17:22, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CCC. Toccata quarta (talk) 17:52, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing names

Many more were Jewish (full, half, whatever)

The name "Capablanca" doesn't exist in Spanish. It's a direct translation of "Weismantel".

Aleksandr Aljokhin was about the only Aljokhin in history who pretended to be not Jewish. Yes, he was anti-semitic and hated the Jews, but so is Bobby Fischer!

Even two of Karpov's grandparents were Jewish. Their real name was Fisch. (Carp is eaten traditionally at the Jewish New Year celebrations, Rosh Hashana.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4DD2:AE33:0:A865:D108:C4AE:F894 (talk) 20:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More likely Capablanca's surname is a Spanish adaptation of the Neapolitan surname Cappabianca. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 04:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Jewish_chess_players&oldid=994066161"