Any Wiki Editors?

I think that looking in the 'view history' of the other chess sites with a wiki, could be a clue to pass the requirements.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Internet_chess_servers
-

Originally posted by moonbus
Status report: a third revision has been submitted for review. The first revisions failed for lack of notability (in the sense required for entry to Wikipedia). If anyone has an idea why RHP is notable, or a good plan to make it so, do tell.

Originally posted by moonbus
Status report: a third revision has been submitted for review. The first revisions failed for lack of notability (in the sense required for entry to Wikipedia). If anyone has an idea why RHP is notable, or a good plan to make it so, do tell. (Personal testimonials don't seem to do the trick--unless you yourself are so notable as to merit a Wiki article of your own.)

Originally posted by moonbus
Status report: a third revision has been submitted for review. The first revisions failed for lack of notability (in the sense required for entry to Wikipedia). )

Complete text of article:

General:[edit source]
redhotpawn.com is an Internet chess server which connects chess players all over the world.
Date of inception: 21 Feb. 2001.
Web address: redhotpawn.com
Slogan: Play chess online, it's free to play and anyone can join.
Type of site: Internet chess server, based on the Rival Chess engine written by Russell Newman and Chris Moreton; social media services are also offered.
Main Features:[edit source]
The site offers chess players a virtual space in which to conduct rated or unrated turn-based correspondence games with various time limits (from 1 to 21 days, in various increments), and blitz games in real-time. The site offers a browser-accessible Java-based user interface with configurable boards and pieces; no software download is required; mobile devices are also supported.
Registration is required (email address); the member defines a unique public user ID and a log pass code; free membership allows access to basic functionality; paid membership ("subscriber" ) allows access to additional functionality. Adverts are unobtrusive for non-subscribers, blocked for subscribers.
Other features include: Fischer Random960 chess, set up pieces from any position, chess-related blogs, individual tournaments, team (“clan” ) tournaments, automatic rate calculation (only relevant to RHP, not directly convertible to OTB (over the board) ELO or USCF ratings). The site offers a searchable data base of players, as well as a searchable data base of played games and games in progress. Completed games can be annotated and published. Private messages can be sent between players. The club feature allows exclusive forums and tournaments for members of those clubs.
There are “greeters” (subscriber volunteers) who offer to assist newbies, for example by engaging them in their first games and showing them around the forums and features.
There are lively chat forums, open to both subscribers and non-subscribers, on various topics including chess, spirituality, politics, science, culture, sports, debate, tournaments, clans, clubs, general interest, posers and puzzles, as well as private forums (for subscribers only). Most forums see postings in several threads each day, so that there is always someone to communicate with. Threads are closed after 60 days to keep the contents fresh. Playing chess is not a requirement for participation in any of the forums.
Internationally accepted rules for correspondence chess apply at RHP: consulting chess books, chess journals, and published (incl. online) data bases of games already played is allowed. It is not required to inform one’s opponent of one’s (intended) use of such resources. Use of engines or endgame tablebases is not allowed for rated games in progress. (“Engine” means chess-playing software used to analyze a game or a position.) Engines and endgame tablebases are allowed for post mortem analysis and unrated games.
Upwards of 200,000 players at all strengths are registered. Upwards of 20,000 games are typically in progress at any time.
Item of note: one of the world’s strongest players, Natalia Pogonina (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natalia_Pogonina), is a member of RHP and maintains a blog there. WGM Pogonina (current ELO 2501) is three-time European champion and the reigning Olympic Women's Chess Champion (2015). She was ranked as the 3rd most successful female chess player in the world in 2009 by the Association of Chess Professionals.
History:[edit source]
The site was originally entirely free and kept alive by donations, but with increasing popularity and features (such as forums and internal messaging), paid membership and advertising were introduced to cover costs. Early iterations of the site offered the Rival Chess engine as an optional opponent when no humans were online. The Rival Chess engine is still available. In 2015, Chris Moreton did some Android engine updates to address the complaint that the Android App was too difficult to beat at all skill levels.
External Links:[edit source]
Mentions and Reviews of RHP:
Edward Scimia review redhotpawn: http://chess.about.com/od/playingchessonline/a/Red-Hot-Pawn.htm
Tactics Time review of redhotpawn: http://tacticstime.com/software/red-hot-pawn-tips/
WebApp.net notice of iPhone client for RHP core features: http://trywebapp.net/news.php?n=36
App-crawler table-format comparison of RHP with 8 other online chess forums: http://appcrawlr.com/app/uberGrid/120974
The Chess Exchange review of RHP: http://www.chessexchange.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=2001
Aurora Chess Club review of RHP: http://www.aucc.club/?p=2081
Alexa site statistics: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/redhotpawn.com
Sources:[edit source]
Russ, site admin & lead developer at redhotpawn.com
RHP TOS: http://www.redhotpawn.com/myhome/termsofservice.php.
RHP history: http://www.redhotpawn.com/blog/blogread.php?blogpostid=1
ICS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_chess_server



Rejection no. 3:
You aren't understanding what we're asking your for.
We aren't asking for a detailed list of features. We aren't asking for links to apps, forums, etc.
What we do want is evidence that outside, uninvolved experts have discussed this site.
Please read our fundamental requirements for Notability, and that will make this much clearer.

Rejection no. 2:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

Rejection no.1:
You can't cite the website itself, nor forums, blogs, etc. We don't care at all what's said internally about the site amongst its community. What we do care about is what neutral, exteral commentators have said. Had this site been discussed in news media, academia, professionally published chess journals?



Compared to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess.com

I don’t see much difference to the proposed RHP article.

EDIT: As Reviewer No.1 & 3 has it, it's not about what RHP is. it's about what other sources say it is.

Originally posted by moonbus
Compared to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess.com

I don’t see much difference to the proposed RHP article.

Originally posted by Stansi
The chess.com article is very borderline (it was nearly deleted in December 2013, and doesn't seem to have improved since then), so it's not really a good guide.

You could try asking on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chess for help getting your article into shape.

Actually, I have been quite surprised by how wikipedia is evolving into a very good
encyclopedia.

I am going on holiday (cycling the lanes of Gloucestershire). I shan't be able to carry this project forward until I get back, sometime in August. Til then, bye and check all checks!

If an overenthusiastic wiki editor edited the word 'wiki' into something like the Korean for 'gyroscope', would the whole world overnight find itself unable to look up those essential articles such as the one on which way people choose to orient toilet paper?

Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
If an overenthusiastic wiki editor edited the word 'wiki' into something like the Korean for 'gyroscope', would the whole world overnight find itself unable to look up those essential articles such as the one on which way people choose to orient toilet paper?

Originally posted by HandyAndy
Over the top as usual.

Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
Have you thought of running a class?

Originally posted by HandyAndy
In histrionics?

Originally posted by NoEarthlyReason
Oh relax. Thanks, I appreciate the feedback, I guess at your age men tend to speak their mind.