Jump to content

Talk:Alexander Khalifman

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

First sentence

[edit]

Khalifman is a former world chess champion. This should be the very first information, not "Khalifman is of Jewish descent" (??!). In what way is that relevant? I very much hope that should someone I know achieve a status that makes him important enough for Wikipedia the first sentence will not be "X is of Christian descent" !! One might even consider deleting that sentence. Thanks 92.228.63.190 (talk) 10:15, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Khalifman's world champion status is mentioned in the opening section. His Jewish lineage is an appropriate thing to mention in the "Early Life" section. (Also, I believe you may be conflating "religion" and "ethnicity". "Jewish" can sometimes mean the one but not the other.) 2601:646:C000:1230:7523:7993:C2E0:52D (talk) 03:37, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Importance to Wiki chess project

[edit]

As a former World Chess Champion a top importance would seem appropriate. ChessCreator (talk) 20:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a sound argument, but I perceive a hugh gap between the importance of Alekhine, Kasparov or Fischer on one side, and Khalifman on the other side. So if you do not mind, I would set it down to High. SyG (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


      • The importance of Khalifman...and of Anand, Ponomariov, Kazimzhinov and Topalov...in being world champions during a time of crisis for FIDE...cannot be overstated. They represent the rule of law -- the functioning of the world title cycle -- at a time when it was under direct attack by persons who viewed the title as private property, rather than as a sports title bestowed upon a player by a public cycle (as it had been from 1948 onward). To say that Fischer, Kasparov or Alekhine were greater players...and therefore of more importance...overlooks this important aspect of Khalifman's title reign. One could say that Fischer, Kasparov and Alkehine were stronger than Euwe and Smyslov, too...but that doesn't get us anywhere. We don't rank US presidents by reputation -- we list them all equally, yes? Khalifman himself -- in 1999 in interviews -- said that although he was not the strongest player in the world (being 44th by rating)...he was clearly the world champion (having won the title in the open, public cycle run by FIDE). That stand -- that position -- is what makes his title reign important. BTW before anyone denigrates the "FIDE Title Champions" ...it should be noted that at least two could be considered super-GMs (Anand and Topalov), and that one (Anand) regained the title via the classical method. Chesspride 66.19.84.2 (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is a matter of opinion. Most chess fans do not regard Khalifman, Ponomariov, or Kasimdzhanov (not "Kazimzhinov") as true world champions, because they won their titles in knockout events (aka "lotteries"), which clearly did not produce world-class champions. Your argument seems to be based on the concept that "if it was the 'law' at the time, then it must be regarded as legitimate," but this argument is disproven by any number of historical examples of bad laws (for instance: the attempt to defend Nazis who committed terrible atrocities by saying they were "just following orders" has been rejected, despite the fact that the German laws at the time allowed such atrocities). You also seem to be forgetting that, concurrent with the FIDE knockout champions, there continued to be a parallel lineage of world champions (Kasparov and Kramnik), carrying on the classical line founded in the 19th century by Wilhelm Steinitz. Your final suggestion--that Anand and Topalov are legitimate champions because of their super-GM status--is contradicted by your own earlier argument, that the strength of champions isn't what makes them champions. 2601:646:C000:1230:7523:7993:C2E0:52D (talk) 04:04, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alexander Khalifman. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:40, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alexander Khalifman. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:18, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alexander Khalifman. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:55, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_Khalifman&oldid=1207960440"