Talk:Ruy Lopez/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Reviewing the Thomas Crown scene...

[1]... it isn't even clear what opening is being played there, at 0:52 he picks up a bishop for his 3rd move, but where it lands is out of screenshot, and then there's a continuity error where they show the position much later in the game where he's about to get mated.

The game it was based on, Zeissl - Walthoffen, is fairly obscure and was taken from Chernev's Logical Chess Move by Move. It was most likely selected for its visual appeal, with the dominant black queen in the centre. Not all of the game is depicted, and the Schliemann Defence itself is not seen in the movie. Conclusion - linking the Schliemann Defence to the Thomas Crown affair movie is invalid. MaxBrowne (talk) 07:40, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I didn't buy the trivia argument but I am convinced from what you say above. ...If anyone speaks Italian. Bosley John Bosley (talk) 11:17, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I think it would be good to have a Chess in film survey article. (We have Category:Films about chess but no main article. Chess in film would be a little broader since it could include any significant reference to chess in a film even if the film is not "about" chess.) The survey article would be an appropriate place for this kind of material, along with the more famous game in 2001: A Space Odyssey, and chess in The Seventh Seal, Harry Potter, etc. The subject has been written about and I think would meet WP:GNG to merit an article. I don't think I have the sources for it, but maybe someone will give it a go. Quale (talk) 16:23, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

We already have chess in the arts. MaxBrowne (talk) 03:30, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, you're right. I had forgotten about that article. Quale (talk) 04:12, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

why don't we have a section or something on the a4 thing that is used for quick draws?

eg levon vs wesley https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dly4PeRrWW8

eg wesley vs magnus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEb1lCJzZ-I

Thewriter006 (talk) 09:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 29 November 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Adumbrativus (talk) 04:09, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Ruy Lopez → Ruy López Opening – Ruy Lopez is missing the accent which is in the opening's name. Additionally, it is missing the word "Opening", despite it being named after Ruy Lopez de segura. Jishiboka1 (talk) 02:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose move. No evidence provided that these changes are necessary – and I daresay the chess opening is the primary topic over its namesake. O.N.R. ^(talk) 03:20, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. "Ruy Lopez" is the common name for this chess opening. The only other reasonable alternatives in English are "Spanish Opening" or "Spanish Game", but I think Ruy Lopez is more common. Quale (talk) 03:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. The opening is definitely the primary topic, and "Ruy López Opening" is not used by any reliable source. Cobblet (talk) 04:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Please note that López (with the accent) has never been the standard spelling in English language sources, nor was it the normal 16th century Spanish spelling. It is also not normal to append the word "opening". Just check out the hundreds of books that have been written on the topic. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 06:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose with Ruy Lopez being the WP:COMMONNAME of the opening (as seen by the sources in the article and books linked by MaxBrowne2) there's no need to disambiguate or add an accent. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 16:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
• Support accent but not "Opening" see James Eade Chess Openings For Dummies 2010 page 79 "Explaining the Ruy López". In ictu oculi (talk) 16:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Eade is in a small minority in using the accent. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 18:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Obviously. That's always the case will all accents in all books. But we follow high MOS sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:37, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

3. a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. Nc3 is not a transposition to the Four Knights Spanish, but instead the Tarrasch Variation of the Morphy Defense

In 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 Nf6(or any other move order to enter the Four Knights game) 4. Bb4, after 4...a6, 5. Ba4 is an illogical move not in the spirit of the four knights spanish(has only been played once compared to 32 games with 5.Bxc6 in the Lichess masters database), therefore it should not be considered a transposition to a Four Knights Spanish if the Four Knights Spanish (almost) never leads there. ChessEnthu (talk) 23:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)