Misplaced Pages

Talk:Berlin Defence: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:33, 7 September 2020 editBruce leverett (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,712 edits Lead reworking proposal← Previous edit Revision as of 01:54, 7 September 2020 edit undoBruce leverett (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,712 edits Lead reworking proposalNext edit →
Line 19: Line 19:


(3) I think the solidity/drawishness of the opening is related to the early trade of Queens. Is this worth mentioning somewhere? If so, I can try to source a good reference to back this up.] (]) 13:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC) (3) I think the solidity/drawishness of the opening is related to the early trade of Queens. Is this worth mentioning somewhere? If so, I can try to source a good reference to back this up.] (]) 13:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
:This seems reasonable. May I make a couple of additional suggestions: :The reorganization seems reasonable. May I make a couple of additional suggestions:
:*"Berlin Wall" does not rise to the level of being an actual name of the variation; it was used by chess journalists for a while after Kramnik revived the line, but not :*"Berlin Wall" does not rise to the level of being an actual name of the variation; it was used by chess journalists for a while after Kramnik revived the line, but the novelty soon wore off.
:*I am not sure it is correct to state that the B.D. is "normally used as a drawing weapon", etc. (However if you can find an article or book that supports that, OK with me.) Later the article (currently) says "a solid opening for Black to use in order to achieve an equal endgame". Although there is no source for this, it is a harmless thing to say, and so it's OK. There are many openings, including this one, in which White can bail to a drawish position if that's all he wants, but that doesn't make it a "drawing weapon". ] (]) 01:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:54, 7 September 2020

WikiProject iconArticles for creation B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Note icon
This article was accepted from this draft on 14 September 2019 by reviewer Scope creep (talk · contribs).
WikiProject iconChess C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lead reworking proposal

The lead section should give "the basics in a nutshell and cultivates interest in reading on". I propose (1) changing the lead to this:

The Berlin Defence, also called the Berlin Wall, is a chess opening that begins with the moves:

e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6


The opening is a variation of the Ruy Lopez. After a period of disuse, it experienced a resurgence in popularity when Vladimir Kramnik used it extensively against Garry Kasparov in the 2000 Chess World Championships. Strategically, the Berlin Defence is normally used as a drawing weapon by players who want to obtain a draw as Black, and by players who prefer to play defensively and reach endgames.

(2) Move the Encylopedia codes to a list at the end of the article, similar to other chess articles. I think these codes are given too much prominence in a few articles, as they're more for the specialized reader.

(3) I think the solidity/drawishness of the opening is related to the early trade of Queens. Is this worth mentioning somewhere? If so, I can try to source a good reference to back this up.Dhalamh (talk) 13:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

The reorganization seems reasonable. May I make a couple of additional suggestions:
  • "Berlin Wall" does not rise to the level of being an actual name of the variation; it was used by chess journalists for a while after Kramnik revived the line, but the novelty soon wore off.
  • I am not sure it is correct to state that the B.D. is "normally used as a drawing weapon", etc. (However if you can find an article or book that supports that, OK with me.) Later the article (currently) says "a solid opening for Black to use in order to achieve an equal endgame". Although there is no source for this, it is a harmless thing to say, and so it's OK. There are many openings, including this one, in which White can bail to a drawish position if that's all he wants, but that doesn't make it a "drawing weapon". Bruce leverett (talk) 01:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Categories: