Wikipedia

Talk:FIDE/Archive 1

< Talk:FIDE
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Pawnkingthree in topic List of presidents
Archive 1

Terrible sentence

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This sentence is so terrible, I don't even know what it's trying to say. Can someone fix it?

"It also awards Master and Grandmaster titles for achievement in problem and study composing and solving and periodically publishing albums of the best chess problems (the FIDE Albums)" FalseLobster (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

ELO rating system

Why doesn't the link to Elo rating (system) work?

Because the article is just called Elo rating :) --Camembert
Ok Thanks... I'm kind of new with this, so not everything goes right...
Don't worry, it takes everyone a bit of time to get used to things. --Camembert

Highest body in chess

I've removed the following:

It used to be the highest body in chess but respected IOC rulings.

FIDE still is the highest body in chess. As I understand it, the IOC recently recognised them as such. They adopted IOC anti-drug rules, but I don't think there have been any "rulings". --Camembert

Can someone explain why this adoption of IOC's anti-drug rules is important in chess? It's not like steroids make you any more intelligent. RedWolf 03:45, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

well, Camembert, according to Karpov, it would not be the worst thing to have FIDE replaced by a more capable organization. He successfully called upon IOC to make Kirsan understand he is undertaking outrageous actions. Quote A. Karpov: Kirsan: "I am the president of chess and you are only the world champ!" Karpov "look Kirsan, you're wrong: I am the world champ and you are only the president!". this was said before the Kamsky-Karpov match in Elista, where Kirsan unilaterally changed match rules to his liking. (slightly abbreviated) Frank A

That's as maybe, but what does it have to do with the IOC? --Camembert
This Kirsan guy would not mess with IOC when Karpov wrote the complaint letter to IOC, but I am not sure whether he is legally bound to. Frank A

Well, I admit I've never heard anything about this incident you're referring to - I daresay if you could give a bit more precision than the sentence I took out of the article, it would be fine to mention. One thing I would say, though: whatever its faults (and it has plenty of them), there is no credible alternative to FIDE as the governing body of chess. To say, therefore, that FIDE "used to be the highest body in chess", implying it isn't any longer, is wrong. --Camembert

FIDE Handbook for Chess

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have forwarded many emails to FIDE for Handbook of Chess on FIDE web site. FIDE Chess Hand book is available in piece wise and same is not available in single file. vkvora 18:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

lyumzhinov - controversial figure

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have deleted "a controversial figure, with question marks over the sources of the money he has donated to FIDE, and accusations against him that he has not paid promised prize money among other things."

Such accusations need to be sourced and stood up.

BlueValour 19:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

May 2006 Turin meeting

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The date mentioned has long since passed, so this section needs to be updated by someone with the relevant information:

Burundi, Ghana and Ivory Coast have been temporarily suspended from membership in FIDE because of their failure to meet their financial obligations. Their memberships will be permanently revoked at the meeting in Turin, Italy on May 27, 2006 if they have not paid their dues by that time.

What happened at the meeting in Turin? Were the 3 memberships permanently revoked or not? --Kuribosshoe 05:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Requested move to World Chess Federation (closed)

Latest comment: 16 years ago22 comments10 people in discussion

This is (old) discussion for a rename to World Chess Federation. For discussion of rename to FIDE, see #Requested move below. Peter Ballard (talk) 02:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Support some possible rename. Quale has a good point about renaming it "FIDE", and that may be the best. My second choice would by "World Chess Federation", since tht is sometimes used in English. I slightly oppose "International Chess Organization/Federation", although it is probably a more literal translation, it is rarely called that by native English speakers. Several have made the point about WP:ENGLISH, so I agree with some sort of channge. Bubba73 (talk), 05:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
    • I can't fully agree with that interpretation of WP:ENGLISH. It says that the name used should be 1) the common name used in English, 2) a name where an English speaker would expect to find the article and one used by other English language encyclopedias. Neither World or International is a name commonly used by by English speakers for FIDE, and I know of no English language encyclopedia that puts the article on FIDE under either of those titles. As I see it, WP:ENGLISH requires that the article stay as is (because Fédération Internationale des Échecs is the official name) or be moved to FIDE (the name overwhelmingly preferred in English). Before any such move to a translated English title is considered, I request that move supporters provide some examples of other English language encyclopedias that use their preferred name as the main entries for the organization. Quale (talk) 16:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Strongly Oppose rename to "World Chess Federation", because that is not it is generally called in English, as stated by Quale. Don't care either way about a rename to "FIDE". Peter Ballard (talk) 10:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Comment At present, I favor renaming it to FIDE the most, but as far as "World Chess Federation", The USCF Official Rules of Chess (Just and Burg), page xxiii calls it the "World Chess Federation, and then gives the French name and the FIDE abbreviation in parentheses. But after that the call it FIDE. Bubba73 (talk), 16:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
"The Official Rules of Chess" by Eric Schiller is similar - on page 15 it first calls it the "World Chess Federation (FIDE)" and then uses FIDE. Bubba73 (talk), 18:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose move to World Chess Federation. Given that the overwhelmingly most common term for the organization is FIDE, and it's pronounced as an acronym, I'd therefore support a move to FIDE; I was going to propose that myself, but am happy to see that User:Quale's beaten me to it. To clarify via Google searches:
FIDE gets 781,000 web hits and 120,000 news hits
"World Chess Federation" gets 58,000 web hits and 2,060 news hits
"International Chess Federation" gets 21,000 web hits and 2,040 news hits
"Fédération Internationale des Échecs" gets 5,000 web hits and 269 news hits
Normally I'd be for spelling it out, but I think our specific naming conventions support FIDE in this instance, à la NASA. Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 15:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose to the move to "World Chess Federation". The most important english publications (e.g. www.chessbase.com) use FIDE as the official name, even if it is a French acronym. So my best would be to move to "FIDE", and my second-best would be to keep it as it is. We can always specify in the lead that the official english-name is World Chess Federation. SyG (talk) 15:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Closing - I'm closing this discussion (because there is clearly no consensus to move), and opening a new one (below) for a rename to FIDE (which has a lot more support). Peter Ballard (talk) 02:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Expansion of history

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've done a big edit, and removed "please expand" and "needs citations" tags. I've left in the for the moment two blocks of commneted out-material: acollection of useful references, and the previous version's summary of the most recent events - please DON'T delete them for a few weeks.

Two things I think need to be discussed:

  • Should we include any discussions of FIDE's performance? Some top players (not just Kasparov by any means) have been quite scathing.
  • There is a lot of overlap with various articles about the World Chess Championship. It's hard to avoid this since managing the championship is FIDE most visible job. I've tried to minimise duplication by concentrating on politics and other circumstances rather than the play. Philcha (talk) 00:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that there should be some mention of FIDE's performance. Most (not just some) top players have been highly critical. For example, in the Foreword (by grandmaster Nigel Short, a former World Championship challenger) to the book "San Luis 2005" about the 2005 World Championship tournament, we read: "...the San Luis Appeals Committee: whilst we had one of the most vital and potentially controversial tournaments in the history of chess, where were these august FIDE gentlemen to be found? Usually not in the playing hall, to be sure. If they did deign to visit the playing complex - and more often they did not, preferring the sanctuary of their town centre hotel, where doubtless they conducted very important business, by the swimming pool and elsewhere - they were usually to be found in the bar area outside the hall." And a few paragraphs later, having mentioned that the FIDE officials included "an extraordinarily large number of other spongers", Short wrote that "... the overwhelming impression of the substantial FIDE bureaucracy present in San Luis - mostly flown in at great expense from different continents - was one of sloth and indolence.".

This cannot be dismissed as a rant by one grandmaster. The authors of the book, Gershon and Nor, who were present at San Luis, would not have accepted such a trenchant Foreword unless they agreed with it and believed it represented the views of most of the eight tournament participants, who were all among the dozen best players in the world at the time. Sayitclearly (talk) 07:46, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Soviet Chess Federation and Cold War

Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Peter Ballard has removed the following:

which thought it had the right to call the shots because it contributed a very large share of FIDE's budget and Soviet players dominated the world rankings - in effect they treated chess as an extension of the Cold War

on the grounds that it's "speculation".

[4] says:

  • "... but in those days, the government considered anyone who left USSR territory a traitor, whose name should disappear forever from the pages of the national press."
  • "... This is a provocation, a provocation" (quoting the USSR Minister of Sports on the televised Euwe-Sosonko mini-match)
  • " ... the Soviet Union was at that time not just a chess superpower – it was the most powerful chessplaying country in the world."
  • "... Soviet delegation leaders, who were ready to press one line and

one line only: the one that had been worked out beforehand."

If support is needed specifically for the phrase "... Cold War":

  • [5] or [6] will do.
  • See also the cited "Campo's Legacy": (a) "Just before the elections (for FIDE president), he (Campo) was tipped off that former world champion Mikhail Botvinnik had sent a telex with instructions that the Soviet bloc vote of some 20 countries be given to the Yugoslav candidate, Bozidar Kazic. ... Soviet Chess Federation president and Double Hero astronaut Vitaly Sevastianov ... explained that they could not go against Moscow ..." (b) "He was impressed when the Soviets sent Sports Vice Minister Viacheslav Gavrilin (to discuss the problematic Korchnoi-Kasparov match).
  • The fact that the decision to unseat Euwe as FIDE president was taken by the Soviet government [7]

I'm prepared to let the bit about the budet go, as it's hard to get details of FIDE's rules on membership fees for the 1970s. Philcha (talk) 08:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't doubt that they used chess for political ends. But to say they the USSR "thought it had the right to call the shots..." goes a bit far for my liking. It smacks of mindreading. p.s. the Sosonko article, while it is excellent, should be used with a little caution (i.e. attribute statements to Sosonko, rather than calling them fact), because as a defector he obviously has a low opinion of the USSR. Peter Ballard (talk) 09:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Peter is exactly right. We can describe what the Soviets did in international chess, and that includes politics. To ascribe a particular state of mind (what the USSR thought) needs a lot better reference than that. We must use more neutral language. I really don't see any evidence that the USSR thought that it had some moral right to call the shots. It acted pretty much the way we expect anyone to act in political matters—selfishly, to protect its own interests. You don't need communism to do that. Edmundson acted the same way to promote Fischer. Viewed more sympathetically to the Soviets, 90% of the world's best players were Soviet. Why shouldn't they have a greater say? Quale (talk) 15:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

  Done - move completed. Neıl ☎ 12:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

Latest comment: 16 years ago11 comments8 people in discussion

Discuss here the requested move from Fédération Internationale des Échecs to FIDE.

That can be handled by using "other uses". There are many abbreviations that have several uses. Bubba73 (talk), 15:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I have some sympathy to calling it "World Chess Federation", but I think FIDE is OK because of uses such as NASA instead of "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" (which is even in English without any accented characters). Bubba73 (talk), 19:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Support: it clearly wins the google test and it is clearly the most likely term to be entered in the search box. BTW, one properly googles it as [8]; same goes for the other terms. Voorlandt (talk) 19:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
There's no such thing as "properly googles" - the whole point of search engines is that they help you to find things whose "proper" names you aren't sure of or can't spell. And your example is biassed because the search string includes "chess". Joe / Jane Public will try "fide" first because searchies are case-insensitive, and may then try "fide chess" there are too many hits that are irrelevant to him / her. Philcha (talk) 08:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't understand—there certainly are proper google queries. Voorlandt isn't talking about how a random person might try to google FIDE, since that is completely irrelevant to what we're discussing here. The point is to try to determine what name is most commonly used for this organization in English. The query he gives is satisfactory for this purpose, and suggests that FIDE is by far the most popular way to refer to Fédération Internationale des Échecs. This is in accord with my experience, and I suspect yours as well. BTW, when I google "fide" alone (an English language search), the very first hit is http://www.fide.com. The primary reason to include "chess" in the search is to reduce the number of false hits on "bona fide" because this is a rough ghit count exercise and we want a more accurate number. If we had an article on the Federation of the European Dental Industry, then it probably should be titled Federation of the European Dental Industry, since it's my guess that that is the name most commonly used for it in English. Quale (talk) 08:39, 8 January 2008 (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.

New Cat?

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello. I created a new cat called Category:Sports trade unions. It soundse like FIDE began as a players association but evolved into a governing body. Would this cat be appropriate for this article?RevelationDirect (talk) 20:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Members

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The sentence There are at present 158 member nations of FIDE. is wrong. Correct is: There are at present 158 member federations of FIDE. Christoph Scholz (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Name

Latest comment: 5 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

FIDE's name in English is the World Chess Federation, see their website. (And English is now the official language of FIDE.) Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 16:44, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

For anyone reading this some years later, FIDE did use "World Chess Federation" for its first 95 years, but sometime in the middle of 2019 it rebranded itself as the International Chess Federation. I'm not certain of the reason for the change; perhaps some other editor knows. There was an individual in Las Vegas who claimed a trademark on "World Chess Federation" and threatened to sue. Possibly he did sue and this was the reason for the change, I'm not familiar with the details. He also claimed to be the true undefeated world chess champion (or co-champion with Fischer or some other similar crazy thing) and offered to play any challenger for the title who would pay him a large purse ($1M, I think) for the privilege. 07:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
It's normally just called "FIDE", just as the football governing is called "FIFA" and left untranslated. Most likely it was simply a translation correction. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 08:44, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
No, it was certainly a deliberate choice driven by some reason. They didn't accidently go by World Chess Federation for 95 years in print and for the last decade or whatever on their website only to suddenly realize the middle of 2019, "oof, we had the translation wrong for the last century". Quale (talk) 14:07, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Nonsense, the official name is and always has been FIDE. "International Chess Federation" and "World Chess Federation" have been used fairly interchangeably as translations over the years, usually in the non-specialist press. FIDE doesn't have an "official" English name and is always referred to as FIDE in their official documents, even if its official language is now English. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
I have to say you aren't very canny or savvy on this point. FIDE and others had consistently used World Chess Federation in print from at least the 1970s until earlier this year, and I wouldn't be surprised to find earlier examples although I have fewer print sources from the 50s and 60s in my library. International Chess Federation was not interchangable. For a recent example, see the FIDE Golden Book from 2016. You can Google it, book sellers descriptions quote the opening and it's in the very first sentence of the book. Quale (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Actually this suggests that "International Chess Federation" was more common until about 2000. FIDE, of course, is orders of magnitude more common than either. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 23:33, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, that's an interesting data point, and digging into my library I do find that in The Official Blue Book and Encyclopedia of Chess (1956) Kenneth Harkness wrote on page 4 "Fédération Internationale des Échecs (International Chess Federation)". I didn't expect to find that, so what I thought I knew about early practice was wrong.
Even if I had been right I should not have been so pissy about a minor disagreement. World Chess Federation did recently have a favored position, see for example the FIDE Handbook which still says "The moral strength of FIDE is manifested by the discipline of its members. Statutes of the World Chess Federation - Fédération Internationale des Echecs - FIDE, founded 20 July, 1924, Paris, France. These statutes were approved by the General Assembly on 13 September 2016 in Baku, Azerbaijan." even though the FIDE website was rebranded in August to use International Chess Federation. My guess is that the handbook will be updated to use "International" when a new version is approved. As late as August 7 (http://web.archive.org/web/20190807003043/https://www.fide.com/) the website had "© World Chess Federation" on most pages, but for some reason not the home page. I don't think "International Chess Federation" was used on the website at that time.
Although I doubt we will know for certain without more evidence, my guess is that FIDE is rebranding to avoid possible confusion with http://worldchess.com/ which is a business affiliate. I don't think we have anything about FIDE's business arrangement with World Chess on this FIDE article, but it is mentioned in World Chess Championship 2020. International Chess Federation also aligns with FIDE's Twitter https://twitter.com/FIDE_chess and Facebook. Quale (talk) 05:01, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Motto

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have tried to improve the translation of the Motto: "Gens una sumus", which once again is rendered "We are one people". It might be that the English Motto is "We are one people", but it is impossible to defend it to be a proper translation. The Gens refer particularly and primarily to the patricians of Rome, when considering the term historically. Secondarily the Plebians (a.k.a. the people) also related themselves as Gens, indicating common anchestry.

It would be erroneous to translate it with tribe, as we're rather talking of race, or nation comprising a multiplicity of tribes; and because the word tribe is tribus already. It would be lack of respect for intelligence and for FIDE, and whoever has chosen it, to ignore the difficulty the motto provoke, and to not assume that it is not meant to be tricky. Similarily to think the motto implies racistic undercurrents is as narrowminded as thinking Grand Master Carlsen is favouring Donald Trump, because of his Trompowskij-opening in the first game of FIDE World Championship 2016.

Instead of fearing the provocation the latin Motto carries with it, and pretending it is not there, let it rather be as challenging as it is, also in it's translation, summoning people of all races, credes and genders to the House of Chess. Thus I challenge whoever finds my suggestion for a proper translation to give a better translation, rather than a political correct and ignorant one. --Xactnorge (talk) 18:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Motto

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have tried to improve the translation of the Motto: "Gens una sumus", which once again is rendered "We are one people". It might be that the English Motto is "We are one people", but it is impossible to defend it to be a proper translation. The Gens refer particularly and primarily to the patricians of Rome, when considering the term historically. Secondarily the Plebians (a.k.a. the people) also related themselves as Gens, indicating common anchestry.

It would be erroneous to translate it with tribe, as we're rather talking of race, or nation comprising a multiplicity of tribes; and because the word tribe is tribus already. It would be lack of respect for intelligence and for FIDE, and whoever has chosen it, to ignore the difficulty the motto provoke, and to not assume that it is not meant to be tricky. Similarily to think the motto implies racistic undercurrents is as narrowminded as thinking Grand Master Carlsen is favouring Donald Trump, because of his Trompowskij-opening in the first game of FIDE World Championship 2016.

Instead of fearing the provocation the latin Motto carries with it, and pretending it is not there, let it rather be as challenging as it is, also in it's translation, summoning people of all races, credes and genders to the House of Chess. Thus I challenge whoever finds my suggestion for a proper translation to give a better translation, rather than a political correct and ignorant one. --Xactnorge (talk) 18:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

membership of individuals and Wikidata impact

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi! a) I wounder if individuals which are listed at the FIDE site are members of FIDE. This has an impact on Wikidata. b) Who would support the addition of an FIDE identifier at Wikidata?
FYI: http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?lang=en&q=Q718# , http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?lang=en&q=Q10873124# , http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?lang=en&q=Q15916730# etc. Regards— Preceding unsigned comment added by לערי ריינהארט (talk • contribs) 21:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Kirsan's withdrawal

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/9254-statement-from-fide.html

There is a change in the leaderboard. 195.228.20.5 (talk) 09:09, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Ilyumzhinov's resignation

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

FIDE officials have alleged that Ilyumzhinov verbally resigned on 26 March 2017

http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/10090-kirsan-ilyumzhinov-announced-his-resignation-as-fide-president.html

http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/10093-kirsan-ilyumzhinovs-denial-and-fide-reply.html

Currently it's all rumours and claims and counterclaims. Can add sourced details of these events if you like, personally I'd prefer to wait until things settle down. MaxBrowne (talk) 01:24, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on FIDE. 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) 19:19, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Headquarters

Latest comment: 6 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion

FIDE headquarters are not in Lausanne. The address on this page: [9] is that of a law office; no actual FIDE officials or employees work there. The address of the CEO, given on this page: [10] is in Athens (Greece). Some other office employees (administrative manager, accountants, "office staff") can be found on this page: [11] and they are evidently Greek, judging from their names, although only e-mail addresses are given. I suppose that perhaps FIDE is somehow "registered" in Lausanne, the way many American corporations are "registered" in Delaware, for some reason of legal convenience. Bruce leverett (talk) 01:28, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

One can get more contact information here. Bruce leverett (talk) 00:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

FIDE headquarters are Lausanne as per notary documents available on Zefix [12], the official Register of Commerce database. Apparently Bruce is confusing legal and operational aspects of commercially established entities. Lawyer office or not, the fact and reality is that "siège social" i.e. HQ is Lausanne, Switzerland. CIO, FIFA and many other sport associations are legally registered in Switzerland though having regional and even global offices in other countries. However, Wikipedia has been established for reflecting facts, namely that FIDE legal seat is Lausanne. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al ashton (talk • contribs) 08:09, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

FIDE moved to Lausanne many years ago in an attempt to be closer to Olympic activity, but moved to Greece in 2004 because Lausanne was too expensive and because FIDE, unlike some other sports organizations, didn't derive any benefit from the proximity to Olympics. Compare with U.S. Chess Federation, which is legally incorporated in Illinois, but which has its headquarters (as noted in the Wiki article) in Crossville, TN. Likewise, Facebook is incorporated in Delaware, but its headquarters, as noted in the Wiki article, are in Menlo Park, CA. Bruce leverett (talk) 01:30, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
To clarify, I recognize the distinction between "legal" and "operational" seats of a corporation. I have never seen the word "headquarters" used to refer to the legal seat, only to the operational seat. If it were generally true that in Wiki Infoboxes, "headquarters" were used to refer to the legal seat, I would certainly concede the point. Bruce leverett (talk) 15:47, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
I would agree with Bruce here. Looking at our Headquarters article, it "denotes the location where most, if not all, of the important functions of an organization are coordinated." It also notes that "many companies have a registered office at a different address to their corporate office." Also see this 2004 article on FIDE's own website which mentions an official "visited the FIDE headquarters in Athens." FIDE opened a Lausanne office in 2007 but it is not referred to as a "headquarters" in that article. And this story on Ilyumzhinov's non-resignation in March reproduces a letter with the Athens address in the FIDE letterhead. While FIDE may be registered in Lausanne for legal purposes, for all practical purposes it operates out of Athens and that is what the infobox should reflect.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:44, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
I had seen this dispute, but at first I was unsure which viewpoint I favored. I find the points offered by Bruce and P-K3 to be persuasive: the registered office is not necessarily the corporate office. If there's enough room, I think it might work to say Headquarters: Athens (legally registered in Lausanne), unless other editors think that to be confusing or unnecessary. I'm not sure how it would look in the infobox. Quale (talk) 00:49, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The article has a section about IOC recognition, which at present is just a stub. That section could be expanded, if reliable sources can be found that describe FIDE's (interesting) history with the IOC, perhaps including the topic of drug testing. If the section were expanded, it would be an appropriate place to mention Lausanne. Bruce leverett (talk) 01:15, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

As explained at length, pointing to the website hosted by Marko has no logic or rational when it comes to indicated the official / legal location. Elections are scheduled on 4 Oct. 2018; all people biasing the debate will have to revisit their line very soon. Stay tuned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al ashton (talk • contribs) 06:55, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on FIDE. 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) 01:48, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Rules change by FIDE

Latest comment: 5 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

I remember reading somewhere that FIDE changed some chess rules due to a "castling problem" set by renown chess composer Nenad Petrović. Unfortunately I can neither remember where nor find it on the net.

I was wondering how many times did FIDE change rules, are those instances recorded ?? It would be great to find information about all those instances and include it in the article. To change rules of an ancient game is not an every day thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.149.62.70 (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

I think the "castling problem" you are thinking of is the one mentioned in Rules of Chess in the section about castling, although it was not discovered by Nenad Petrović. The rules were amended, but it was more of a clarification than an actual change.
FIDE has a Rules Committee, and they make changes every few years, but their changes are mostly about things like time controls and how to direct a tournament, not to "ancient" things like the moves of the pieces. Bruce leverett (talk) 16:45, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
For the record, this is from the Castling article: Tim Krabbé composed a joke chess problem containing vertical castling (king on e1, underpromoted rook on e8). The loophole in the definition of castling upon which this problem was based was removed by the new (June 1974) requirement that the castling rook must occupy the same rank as the king.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:32, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
There are sometimes real theoretical changes, such as the fivefold repetition and 75-move rules (from 2014) that stop a game from going on forever even if both players don't mind. Nenad Petrović's controversial problems were regarding chess composition: the issue is that, under the conventions for chess composition (codified in the Codex for Chess Composition), castling is assumed possible unless it can be proved otherwise, but en passant is assumed impossible unless it can be proved otherwise. (Reason for the first one being that you could usually not prove castling was allowed; for every proof game leading to the position with a castling right, you could preface some knight-and-rook dancing like 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.Ng1 Rg8 3.Nf3 Rh8 4.Ng1 Ng8 that would disable a specific castling right. Only in some situations involving the "dead position" rule does it become possible to prove that castling is allowed.) These can interact, so it is possible to find a position in which you can prove that if castling is still allowed, the last move must have been the double step of a pawn! So, as in this example, you could make an en passant capture the key move, with White then having to prove the legality of his move by castling, and Black's defense consisting of trying to stop that castle! This has, obviously, been controversial (because it makes the moves' motivations seem "non-chess"; Black's defense might even open himself to mate, but if it stops the castle, White cannot execute that mate!). The codex recommends that the use of this convention be stated; some composers do and some don't. (There are even stranger versions, e.g. proving the right to the first move a posteriori. ^_^) Double sharp (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Retrograde analysis conventions are not part of FIDE's brief, nor are they part of the rules of chess. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 05:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I know that they are not, but I clarified this because the OP mentioned Petrović, whose castling problem impacted retroanalysis conventions rather than the rules of chess. (He probably intended Krabbé, as mentioned before.) Double sharp (talk) 11:08, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
When I wrote, "... about ... how to direct a tournament", I was thinking of changes like fivefold repetition and the 75-move rule. Bruce leverett (talk) 11:46, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

List of presidents

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I do not understand the objection to including a (historical) list of FIDE presidents. All the presidents have their own articles, so it's not like we're shoveling non-notable material in through a side door. I see that, for example, FIFA has a list of its presidents, and I suspect that articles about other major sporting organizations have similar things. The argument that "this should be left to the FIDE website" doesn't sound right. Wikipedia is not an overflow bin for items that don't fit in the FIDE website. But by comparison, I am glad that the list of member nations has been removed; it is just not practical for us to maintain that list, and the fact that an interested reader can look up member nations on the FIDE website is a relevant consideration. Bruce leverett (talk) 16:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree and have reverted the removal of the presidents.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:FIDE/Archive_1&oldid=1175972932"