User talk:Voyager39

Welcome!

Hello, Voyager39, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Mukul Shivaputra Komkali, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Lәo_(βǃʘʘɱ) 15:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Mukul Shivaputra Komkali

A tag has been placed on Mukul Shivaputra Komkali requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Lәo_(βǃʘʘɱ) 15:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Methods for comparing top chess players throughout history

I have no problem adding any claims that Anand is the greatest ever or even one of the greatest ever. The issue I have with the Khalifman quote is that it doesn't compare Anand to Fischer or either of the K's, or in fact anyone other than Topalov. It's a comparison between two players, Anand and Topalov, and Khalifman says Anand is better. I don't think every comparison of two players is appropriate for that page. The comparison has to be how the player fits into all the best players in history. I think you can probably find an opinion from a source considered reliable for chess which says that Anand is one of the best all time, and that would be appropriate for the page. Quale (talk) 02:47, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I respect your logic behind moving the Khalifman quote from Methods for comparing top chess players throughout history to World Chess Championship 2010. I do however wish to bring your attention back to what was my original intent. I have observed this page frequently. Few years ago, I started wondering as to what is the acceptable time period for this page to remain hostage to the old statistics of Jeff Sonas, Raymond Keene, Nathan Divinsky, Matej Guid and Ivan Bratko. More recently I observed many past players (or their protege) beginning to exploit this page to proclaim greatness. My additions were merely an attempt to coerce a reflection on the "present state" because "Throughout History" seems to have stopped at 2005! The elo list only adds to the confusion because it is inflationary in nature. In my humble opinion, the present cathartic state is a bigger violation of encylopedia guidelines then my attempt to update it. Do remember that Wikipedia is visited by more lay people (who will be seriously mislead/confused by the data upto 2005) then experts (who can objectively transpose it to year 2011). A lot of 10 year old kids use Wikipedia to learn and write their homework. It is fine if we want to wait till someone of great repute explicitly compares current players to Fischer or either of the K's, or someone acceptable comes forth with up-to-date statistics beyond 2005. That may happen tomorrow, or may not happen for another 10 years. Till then we can keep our heads buried in sand. Voyager39 (talk) 19:02, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Methods for comparing top chess players throughout history

"Classical" doesn't link to anything on Wikipedia and that's why I changed "Classical" to "Professional Chess Association" so that viewers can click on the hyperlink and get a proper perspective of the history of how it evolved from "Braingames" to "Classical" etc. I think it would be appropriate to revert.

Your draft article, User:Voyager39/Kakri

Hello, Voyager39. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kakri".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Sennecaster (talk) 07:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]