Jump to content

Talk:Modern Benoni/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sasata (talk · contribs) 20:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll review this article. I'm more of a Nimzo-Indian fan myself, but this opening certainly has merit :) I'll have comments up in a few days. Sasata (talk) 20:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, so am I :) I do have a question that I couldn't find answered in WP:MOS: is the use of vide infra and vide supra or their abbreviations discouraged? There are several places in this article where I want to refer to things said earlier/later and while wikilinks help, I still need text I can wikilink. Or maybe you can suggest ways I could organize things better. Thanks for your help and I look forward to your comments. Cobblet (talk) 01:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't answer your question, but it is related to it: WP:IBID. Toccata quarta (talk) 04:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you've solved this issue with anchors. Sasata (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. I thought this was a very well-written article, and I enjoyed reading it. Below are some suggestions for you to consider. I'll spot-check some of the sources soon. Sasata (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reading on, I see that article twice states that Nunn gave up the Benoni because of the Taimanov attack, but only the second instance is cited. Consider removing the first instance.
  • "By the end of the decade, the Modern Main Line had also emerged as a dangerous weapon for White, which only compounded Black's troubles." source?
  • "According to Donner, while he spent over two hours on the game, Tal used only fifteen minutes." Is this detail relevant for this article?
    • It's definitely not essential and I wouldn't mind removing it. I included it to illustrate how easy Black's play can be (for Tal, anyway!) and how even grandmasters can have trouble coping with it. Cobblet (talk) 07:52, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • link Ojanen, Keres
  • "Black's half-open e-file also grants him a certain degree of influence" why "also"?
  • "A rook on e8 will pressurize White's e-pawn" I don't think using "pressurize" like this is "proper" English (see here)
  • "… Tal would go on to win his first Soviet championship." Perhaps unnecessary detail? If you disagree, then at least add a source.
  • end of first paragraph of "Variations" needs a citation
  • "Nevertheless, the most critical lines"
  • "Here theory divides into three major branches:" Need a source for this and for "White also has several important alternatives, the most popular of which are:" soon after
    • Palliser's Chess Developments: Modern Benoni divides the 7.Nf3 lines into three chapters in exactly the way I mentioned. I could cite the book but I'm not sure what page number to cite—the table of contents, perhaps? With respect to statements regarding popularity, these are generally observations I glean from databases (chesstempo.com is what I use these days.) If this is considered WP:OR I could remove the words "most popular". Cobblet (talk) 07:52, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which was recently recommended for White" avoid the use of the dateable term "recently"; similar issue with calling Gashimov the "current" strongest practitioner ... is there a way to reword this?

Non-Reviewer Comment. I note that Marshall is given credit for the MB's 'invention' on three occasions (lede/photo/history). Whilst I can see that Keene may have inferred this in Nimzowitsch: A Reappraisal, he chooses the word "introduced" rather than "invented". The reason for this word choice becomes more apparent in Palliser's Modern Benoni: Revealed pp.18-20, when he explains that the Modern Benoni concept first appeared in Alekhine-Capablanca, played earlier in the same tournament, and we can see that Marshall then develops the idea a step further. Notice Palliser also uses the term '"introduced" rater than 'invented'. It may depend on your definition of 'invent', but my dictionary mentions "an original idea" and for that reason I would probably change the wording slightly. Brittle heaven (talk) 15:04, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Certainly there were previous games that featured the opposing pawn majorities that characterize the Modern Benoni. The earliest example I could find was Burn–Pollock, Hastings 1895. But the point of the 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 e6 move order is to force this pawn structure, and Marshall was the first person to play this way. Cobblet (talk) 10:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've spot checked a few sources and found them to be accurately represented. The sources are reliable and relevant for an article of this nature. All images have appropriate licenses. I'm confident that the article meets all of the good article criteria, and am happy to promote it at this time. Good work, and please write more articles! Sasata (talk) 04:06, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]