Talk:European Go Championship

Results

Is now Ok about references ? PetitBouda (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2010 (UTC) PetitBouda (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC) results are written on every finals results in references. To tell if somebody lost or won, the only thing is to read correctly the board.

Notability

I see that the notability of this page is questioned. How can a continental title in a popular mind sport be non-notable? These tournaments often draw over a thousand players and receive mentions in the national press of the country in which they are held. Am I missing something?--ZincBelief (talk) 19:46, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you are - I'm equally baffled. Trafford09 (talk) 00:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

In fact, if you follow links from Special:WhatLinksHere/European_Go_Championship, you'll see it's even on the Current events Portal, & a candidate for a News item. Curious. Trafford09 (talk) 01:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

it is on the Current events Portal due to the fact that the creator of the article added it there with this edit - not really curious (demonstration of why you should not use WP as a self source).

The reason why it is tagged for Notability is quite simple if you do a Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL you will see exactly Zero Gnews hits and only 161 Ghits, and it is not clear that it has any significant Independent and reliable coverage, happy to see the tag removed if they can be shown to exist. Codf1977 (talk) 08:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I think you need to go beyond using Google as the font of all knowledge. :) Every country which hosts a European Go Congress (Which awards the title of European Go Champion) has some news reports on it, unless the event is in the UK or Ireland these will not be English Language reports. If you are prepared to put in the time you will find the news stories. You can start with the Irish Go Association article you have listed for deletion. Maybe look on http://www.britgo.org for mentions of Go in the press. --ZincBelief (talk) 09:36, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Well Google is a barometer of what others outside the world of Go are writing about either the Irish Go Association or European Go Championship and in both cases it looks like very few people are and so it is not clear that either are notable, further highlighted by the fact that rather than you being able to show it is with links you try to teach me how to. Codf1977 (talk) 09:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you seriously trying to tell me that you couldn't find this page and read the news coverage here about the EGC? http://www.britgo.org/history/media is very easy to find. I think you should stop tenditious editing of wikipedia.--ZincBelief (talk) 09:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Well when looking for sources I tend to want an independent starting point, and even if you look at the Mentions of Go in UK Media page you will see that over the last 10 years only 22 mentions in National papers including three reviews of the same book, two of which from the same source one on the hard back version the other on the paperback, two from "letters Pages", one is to "picture of LSE Go Club stand on front of Education section" - the only times the word "European" is used is in relation to "Maidenhead Advertiser - "Germans Go for European victory"" (and in relation to a mention in the publication The European) and still can't help but notice you are not able to provide any sources so the tag is still justified. Codf1977 (talk) 11:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Use your common sense, Codf1977 (and don't use words in bold - your arguments do need help, but that sort impresses nobody).

If you look beyond UK media, in the link ZincBelief supplied you'll easily find http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7651145.stm.

Now, admittedly it doesn't mention the word European, but can't you see that "Nearly 4,000 competitors and officials from 143 countries and regions" means there were many from Europe?

I can supply exact numbers, should you still be in doubt, and all Europeans got there via the auspices of the European Go Federation, and virtually all will have honed their competitive skills in the European Go Championship. Time to bow out? Trafford09 (talk)

Trafford09 you are so way off the point here - I am not saying Go is not notable just that the European Go Championship appear not to be. "Common sense" is irrelevant in this matter what is missing is any verifiable prof that the European Go Championship are notable as demonstrated by significant coverage in reliable sources. Codf1977 (talk) 12:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

http://www.xs4all.nl/~egcc/tourney/ec/echistory.html is another pointer to the obvious. Television coverage of the European Go Congress. You can keep on looking for other sources in Russian, Swedish, Finnish, Hungarian, Czech, German, French, Dutch, Italian to improve the article, but please drop the tenditious editing. The subject and event is clearly notable.--ZincBelief (talk) 11:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

As a involved editor you believe the European Go Championship should be notable, however I am looking for the evidence that it is and sorry but a user page at a Dutch ISP does not come even close to that. Codf1977 (talk) 12:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

You are not looking for the evidence. If you had you would have found it by now.--ZincBelief (talk) 13:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I have looked and can't find it - you clearly don't have any or you would have posted it here to shut me up. Codf1977 (talk) 14:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I have posted 2 links which already refer to media coverage. One is a replication by the European Cultural Go Centre which uses as its source the Dutch Go Bond magazine. You can research this further at your leisure. It seems to my mind to be quite a reliable source. In this source we are told that TV cameras covered the European Championship event. The other link is from the British Go Association, it records media coverage of the European Championship (abbreviated to EGC in some instances). I have not looked for non english language sources. Can you clearly explain to me why you completely discard these two sources as reliable evidence that media coverage has taken place of the European Go Championship?--ZincBelief (talk) 14:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The European Cultural Go Centre replication has no indication of who wrote it, what the source was or who as checked it - and falls short of a reliable source. The British Go web page is clearly not independent and with out links to any of the articles it is impossible to say if they are mentions or significant coverage. The only mentions to EGC are in relation to the 1992 event in the UK but look like just routine local news coverage. Codf1977 (talk) 15:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The section you quote also says "Run-of-the-mill events — common, everyday, ordinary items that do not stand out — are probably not notable.".

The European Go Championship is not that at all - it's a long-standing continent-wide event - run annually since 1957 - organised by bone fide national organisations such as the BGA, and rotated around Europe.

The page wp:EVENT that you quote starts with this proviso: "It (the WP:N gudeline) is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.". So you're not quite right to suggest that common sense can be conveniently discarded.

To me, the 53-year-old continental event - 5 winners of which have articles on WP - is manifestly notable.

I really cannot imagine why anybody - except a born conspiracy-theorist or somebody with ulterior motiives - could possibly think otherwise. Trafford09 (talk) 17:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

1. WP:INHERITED 2. I am just looking at the facts - exactly zero GNews hits less than 200 G hits for a 53-year-old continental event - any other notable event would have more than that.

The consensus is clear. The tag should be removed. Continuing to attempt to argue with an WP:IDHT editor is a just of time. Gerardw (talk) 17:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The consensus may be to remove the tag, but the issue has not been addressed - the full version of the notability tag says "Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic." there are none provided - it is clear COI/POV pushers win over so WP gets another article that over states the notability of the subject. Codf1977 (talk) 18:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Codf1977, I see you have also asked for deletion of the Irish Go Association article. I respect you wanting to maintain WP standards, but Go is the oldest board game in the world (and certainly one of, if not the most popular), and these are both internationally respected organisations. I know that verifiability rather than truth is important for WP articles, but in both these cases their notability is easily established, and common sense should prevail. Oniscoid (talk) 18:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I accept everything you are saying but if it "easily established" why has it been so hard to find significant coverage of this event ? Codf1977 (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

That would be because you are looking in the wrong places, certainly. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

http://shipin.people.com.cn/GB/12197908.html and http://qipai.titan24.com/2010-07-23/11323.html both international news

and similarly, for the 2009 European Go Congress (of which the Championship is the major event), an English language page from the official site of the Netherlands Embassy of the People's Republic of China Oniscoid (talk) 23:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I know nothing of go, but I know a lot about finding sources, and have added five reliable ones to the article, with proper attribution, verifying various tidbits of information. I'll leave it to subject matter experts to integrate, modify, remove, etc.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Young-Sam Kim

Young Sam Kim (the go player) has nothing to do with the former Korean president apart from sharing the name.Proof:http://www.bibabaduk.net/index.php?p=pContent&mid=25 .Anti Tormanen is not a hockey player as well.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on European Go Championship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081221131259/http://www.figg.it:80/rome2006/results/main/results.html to http://www.figg.it/rome2006/results/main/results.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090218054621/http://goverband.at:80/egc2007/results/main_wall.htm to http://goverband.at/egc2007/results/main_wall.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Offline} 12:59, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on European Go Championship. 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/20100109173358/http://www.intergofed.org/history/gohistory.htm to https://intergofed.org/history/gohistory.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.goweb.cz/egc2005/results.asp?id=144&lang=en
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214003745/http://egc2013.go.art.pl/EGC-finals.html to http://egc2013.go.art.pl/EGC-finals.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:37, 25 September 2017 (UTC)