|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 61 OF 127 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-26-14 | | dakgootje: Right.
And we are a dwarf pirate and a seasonal celebration (as well as a honorable dwarf pirate - actually, does that make you a judge among dwarf pirates? I think the next history project should try to get to the bottom of that). |
|
Jan-26-14
 | | SwitchingQuylthulg: We are also a Quylthulg and a buffalo man :) |
|
| Jan-26-14 | | dakgootje: That's true - so why aren't we worldrenowned chess players? We seem to have all the right characteristics. |
|
Jan-26-14
| | SwitchingQuylthulg: Perhaps because we are also a were-gutter, a tragic Danish hero, a spruce and an ancient Egyptian city. In other words, we also have all the wrong characteristics :) |
|
Jan-26-14
 | | WCC Editing Project: <Dak the Halls>
You raise a serious point about titles. Here in the west we are familiar with the title gradation <Expert Dwarf Pirate> <Candidate Dwarf Pirate> <Honorable Dwarf Pirate> <International Honorable Dwarf Pirate> <The Right Honorable Judge Dwarf Pirate> But the Soviets had a very different system.They only had two levels and two titles. <Pioneer Dwarf Pirate> <Dwarf Pirate in the Gulag> |
|
Jan-26-14
 | | OhioChessFan: Game Collection: WCC: Steinitz-Gunsberg 1890-1891 <Initially the match received less interest than expected because Steinitz was considered a prohibitive favorite, and also because a popular ongoing cable match between Steinitz and Chigorin had to be interrupted.> I'd like a comma after "Initially", and maybe after "because". <In game 5 Steinitz lost with the white pieces in a Queen's gambit, after which he vowed to keep playing this opening until he won with it.> Comma after 5 seems right. I'm not convinced "this" opening is correct. I sort of prefer "that" opening. |
|
Jan-26-14
| | OhioChessFan: I would also like the g in "gambit" to be capitalized. |
|
Jan-27-14
| | WCC Editing Project: <Ohio>
That collection is already promoted to an official page here: Steinitz-Gunsberg World Championship Match (1890) So for this one at least, the boat on style edits has sailed. When/if you have time/inclination, this "finished" draft here could benefit greatly from an "Ohioization" or three: Game Collection: WCC: Euwe-Alekhine Rematch 1937 |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Karpova: <Jess: QUESTION: Which draft should we send in next?> I would suggest Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921 for the simple reason that this was planned to be the first submitted draft, see the discussion at the end of October (around pages 45 to 46). Here is the WSZ link for source 1: "ANNO / Österreichische Nationalbibliothek" http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a... And write out Lasker's forename in sources 4, 7, 11, 13, 15, 18 and 19 to avoid confusion with Edward. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <Ayattila the Hun>
Game Collection: WCC: Euwe-Alekhine Rematch 1937 <"Dutch guilder" was outperforming the "Austrian schilling."> I'm not sure why these are in quotes. Please enlighten me with your intimate knowledge of international monetary policies. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <Fearless Leader>
Game Collection: WCC: Euwe-Alekhine Rematch 1937 <From a mandatory 30 games, the first to 15 1/2 points with 6 wins would triumph, with Euwe enjoying draw odds.> Feels like a run-on sentence. Also what happens if nobody has won 6 games after 30 have been played? |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <Ma ma ma Mayatollah> <The time control was 40 moves in 2 1/2 hours; next 24 moves 1 1/2 hours; one hour for every 16 moves after, with the 1st adjournment after Black's 40th move and the 2d after Black's 80th move.> Eek. I hate to run on about run-ons...well, no, I love it actually. This one has to be chopped up into bite sized chunks. "The time control was 40 moves in 2 1/2 hours with the next 24 moves in 1 1/2 hours and 16 moves per hour thereafter. The 1st adjournment came after Black's 40th move and the 2d after Black's 80th move." We've already danced around the "2d" vs "2nd" issue. I guess "2nd" is the American way which is to say the right way but we probably won't go to war over it although we love to go to war over the silliest of issues. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <Bearded Lady>
Game Collection: WCC: Euwe-Alekhine Rematch 1937 <Eliskases claimed "every sound can be heard on the stage.> In your note to Alekhine vs Euwe, 1937, this is "Every sound can be heard on the stage." A minor point but, hey, that's why you hired us nitpickers. |
|
Jan-27-14
| | WCC Editing Project: <Karpova>
<Here is the WSZ link for source 1: "ANNO / Österreichische Nationalbibliothek" http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a...And write out Lasker's forename in sources 4, 7, 11, 13, 15, 18 and 19 to avoid confusion with Edward.> Good thinking. |
|
Jan-27-14
| | WCC Editing Project: <Tim>
Brilliant, thank you- I put all your Fedexes in. As for the WHAT HAPPENS IF NO 6 GAMES, <crawfb5> explained it to me. I even understood- for a while. I fear we may have to consult him yet again...
In the mean time, since <Karpova> has teed up the next ball, that's the draft we should be examining, just like we examined the recently promoted draft. So this one here is on tap now for "pre-promotion" examination: Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921 ##################### |
|
Jan-27-14
| | WCC Editing Project: <Karpova>
Ok I did it, though it was a lot of "Emanuel" labor. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <WC Fields>
Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921 <Capablanca sent him another private letter asking "But why should he not play me on the same terms that he has granted to all other aspirants for his title?.".> Surely he didn't say in his letter to Lasker "...why should he not play..." He would have used the 2nd person, non? Also, notice the proliferation of punctuation at the end. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <Water Closet Champion> Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921 <Lasker replied to Capablanca's first letter, that the Cuban...> The comma after "letter" is not needed, which is my nice way of saying it's wrong. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <World Couch Camper> Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921 <Both Amos Burn16 and the "British Chess Magazine"17 sided with Capablanca as the proposed conditions were obviously in favor of Lasker.> After whetting the reader's appetite for the match conditions, we should at least point to a reference that describes them. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <What Cheddar Cheese!> Game Collection: WCC: Lasker-Capablanca 1921 <The conditions were 8 games up, without draws, if the match lasted no longer than 24 games.> Say wha? Perhaps it's getting too late here but I don't understand this, which makes it difficult to translate it into the King's English. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Karpova: <Boomie: Surely he didn't say in his letter to Lasker "...why should he not play..." He would have used the 2nd person, non?> He did. This was a statement issued through Rosebault, wherein he always speaks of <Dr. Lasker> using the 2nd person. This is the actual quote and it was written by Capablanca himself. I guess he did so as he was directing it at Rosebault and not Dr. Lasker himself. I agree that it looks strange to introduce it as a private letter. F D Rosebault was a representative of Capablanca, e. g. he handed Capablanca's challenge to Dr. Lasker (page 56 of Winter's Capablanca book, citing page 267 of the December 1911 'ACB'). So maybe introduce it as a "statement issued through F D Rosebault" rather than a "private letter"? <Jess>
If a footnote isreferenced in a sentence, wouldn't it be better to have a space between it and the preceding word, e. g. instead of "Both Amos Burn16 and the "British Chess Magazine"17 sided with Capablanca" better "Both Amos Burn 16 and the "British Chess Magazine" 17 sided with Capablanca". Burn16 sounds like an internet pseudonym. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Karpova: <Boomie: After whetting the reader's appetite for the match conditions, we should at least point to a reference that describes them.> This has been already done, it's source <11>. |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Karpova: <Boomie: <The conditions were 8 games up, without draws, if the match lasted no longer than 24 games.> Say wha? Perhaps it's getting too late here but I don't understand this, which makes it difficult to translate it into the King's English.> The whole text from the source is <The match to be one of eight games up, drawn games not to count, but if, after 24 games, neither player has scored eight games, then the player having the greater number of points to be declared the winner.> |
|
| Jan-27-14 | | Boomie: <Karpova: <Boomie: After whetting the reader's appetite for the match conditions, we should at least point to a reference that describes them.>
This has been already done, it's source <11>.> Excellent. Thank you. |
|
Jan-27-14
| | WCC Editing Project: <Karpova>
<If a footnote is referenced in a sentence, wouldn't it be better to have a space between it and the preceding word, e. g. instead of "Both Amos Burn16 and the "British Chess Magazine"17 sided with Capablanca" better "Both Amos Burn 16 and the "British Chess Magazine" 17 sided with Capablanca".Burn16 sounds like an internet pseudonym.>
Yes you are right. This would be a good idea to make it easier for us to check the drafts about to be promoted. Once promoted we don't have to worry about this because the NOTES will be in those little brackets and such. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 61 OF 127 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
