Talk:List of female chess grandmasters

youngest 2600

so are we gonna exclude the youngest 2600 thing still? http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=List_of_female_chess_players&type=revision&diff=1059888648&oldid=1059868715 i mean come on top peak FIDE has the youngest 2800 thing... http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/List_of_chess_players_by_peak_FIDE_rating#2800+

Thewriter006 (talk) 02:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

• First to reach 2500 rating seems more relevant to the GM title, but the requirement used to be 2450 and I don't know when it switched, so I left it out. (Also the 100-point bonuses may affect this, and I didn't think that was worth mentioning.) Sportsfan77777 (talk) 06:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
• Also, looks like Hou Yifan reached 2600 at 16 yr 10 months, while Judit Polgar did it at 16 yr 11 months, but that's misleading because they only used to publish rating lists every six months. So stating who got there at a younger age is more of a reflection of that discrepancy. Judit probably actually holds the record in terms of unpublished ratings. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 06:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

* ah you mean the live rating vs the FIDE rating? Thewriter006 (talk) 18:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

record youngest female GM before judit polgar

In 1991, Susan Polgar became the first woman to achieve the GM title through three conventional norms. Later that year at age 15, her younger sister Judit Polgar became the youngest Grandmaster in history among men or women, breaking the previous record set by Bobby Fischer. --> ok good but please mention Judit broke Susan's record, Susan broke Maia's record. See the 'Youngest female grandmaster ever at the time' here http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=List_of_female_chess_players&oldid=1059868715

Thewriter006 (talk) 09:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

• I think it's a bit of a moot point who was the youngest when there were only two or three GMs at the time, and none of them were particularly young. I did mention that the Polgar sisters were relatively young when they started obtaining norms. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 12:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Gaprindashvili

I guess that the explanation of how Gaprindashvili got her title is taken from Graham. However, Graham's account looks rather shaky to me. First, Gaprindashvili had two tournaments, not just one, in which she fell a half point shy of a GM norm: Sandomierz 1976 and Dortmund 1978. Second, the arithmetic is wrong in the sentence "Nona was two or three games short of the requirements", whether you count just Lone Pine and Dortmund, or you count Sandomierz, Lone Pine, and Dortmund. Third, where is he getting his account of how FIDE, somehow anticipating by several months an overhaul of their title requirements, magnanimously created a loophole for a player applying under the current requirements? This looks implausible at best. In editing Nona Gaprindashvili, I have refrained from trying to come up with an explanation for the discrepancy between the two near-miss norms and the title awarded. I note, by the way, that a GM title had similarly been awarded to Rosendo Balinas, based on one eye-catching GM norm at Odessa 1976, and two near-misses in earlier tournaments. Unless one can find more convincing documentation of FIDE's logic, I would recommend treating Gaprindashvili's title award similarly in this article to how I have treated it in the biography article, and remove the dubious "Gaprindashvili: FIDE decision" notation in the Direct Awards section. Bruce leverett (talk) 04:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't mention either of those points Graham made that are incorrect. As it's been discussed on Nona's talk page, it's clear that she didn't meet the GM requirements stated in the 1976/7 FIDE yearbook. In line with what Graham wrote, FIDE must have circumvented those requirements somehow, even if his full explanation is not entirely sound. If you have a good source that FIDE did something similar for Balinas, we can add that as context in the prose to show it wasn't an isolated incident. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 07:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

QiYu Zhou

Chess.com claims that QiYu Zhou is a women's grandmaster, https://www.chess.com/players/nemo-qiyu-zhou

"Zhou became a woman international master after winning the 2015 North American U-18 Championship and made all her woman grandmaster norms that same year. She then became the first Canadian woman grandmaster and won the Canadian Women's Championship a year later in 2016."

I don't see her mentioned on the Wikipedia list of women grandmasters, nor even on the lists of female chess players. If the first omission is due to a 'technicality' regarding FIDE norms/recognitions vs. other systems, perhaps a paragraph can be added to the women grandmaster list explaining or noting the discrepancy for the casual observer?* But in any case, why is she not listed on the "otherwise renowned" women in chess page?

• i.e. "Some other chess players have been given the title Women's Grandmaster by other organizations and therefore style themselves a such, but..."

172.98.219.221 (talk) 06:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

See Qiyu Zhou. She's a Woman Grandmaster, not a Grandmaster.

The confusion is understandable since the article is completely inadequate in explaining the difference between the women's titles and the open titles. The page buries its single mention of the WGM title in a two-sentence footnote. Instead the article expends many words and much of the reader's time expounding on topics such as the Ostend 1907 chess tournament. Completely understandable as it's obvious and indisputable that Ostend 1907 is vastly more important to women's chess than the WGM and WIM titles are. Quale (talk) 03:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

The entire section, "Birth of the Grandmaster title", does not belong in this article, because who would look for it here? The material in it belongs in Grandmaster (chess); some of it is already there. It doesn't help this article to have a big blob of background material that barely even mentions women (one reference to Menchik). It is distracting and should be removed, or replaced by a one-sentence summary or cross-reference to Grandmaster (chess). Bruce leverett (talk) 16:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Active players and otherwise

What sources are used for the claims that some players are "active" and others are not? What are the criteria for determining if a player is "active"?

The background color for Zhu Jiner is white, but presumably should be gray, since the little superscript circle indicates that she is considered active. Bruce leverett (talk) 16:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd imagine it should be the FIDE requirement, i.e. whether a player has played at least one rated game in the last year. Double sharp (talk) 14:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

WGM

At present, the distinction between WGM and GM is noted both in the main text and in note A. This can't be right.

Formerly it was noted only in note A. Generally, when we have an article about X, and we want to warn readers that X is not the same as Y, we can mention the distinction in the main text, or mention it in a note, or somehow balance them with a little of both.

Perhaps the right Wikipedia tool to use is a hatnote. Woman grandmaster redirects to the appropriate paragraph of FIDE titles, so that would give the confused reader something to look at. See WP:Hatnote for more details.

I did not object to using note A, because the discussion of WGM in that note is really too distracting to use in the main text. Moreover, space in the first paragraph of an article, let alone the second sentence of that paragraph, is expensive real estate. Following MOS:LEAD, we should go to great lengths to avoid talking about tangential things like WGM at that point in the article. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't fully agree. General readers really don't know that women who are GMs are not the same as Woman Grandmasters and burying this in a note isn't sufficient. This really does cause confusion. The note itself is probably too long and could be tightened, and the certainly the explanation of Woman GM title could be reworded if desired.

A different problem is that there is too much prose for a list article. I don't know the best solution for that. Possibly much of the prose should be moved to women in chess leaving the list, or maybe the article title should be changed to not suggest that it is a list article. Quale (talk) 04:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

I support the suggestion to use a hatnote. It seems like it was created for this kind of purpose. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 08:52, 23 January 2024 (UTC)