Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emory Tate

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:52, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Emory Tate

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Some debate concerning notability. Main debate seems to focus on number of reliable sources. CivilianArthur (talk) 19:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CivilianArthur (talk) 19:49, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:44, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This might be a case of the sources not being available due to systematic bias. Tate is an important figure in the African American chess community and Daaim Shabazz, a professor at Florida A&M and a chess enthusiast, has published Triple Exclam!!! The Life and Games of Emory Tate, Chess Warrior and has written about him extensively at his website The Chess Drum [1], [2]. But as it is a blog, it would probably not count as a reliable source.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article includes some lightweight material citing unreliable sources, but I would think that the Chess Life obituary and the chess.com obituary should be considered reliable sources. (There is also an obituary in chessbase.) I would also be inclined to treat Triple Exclam as a reliable source to some degree, although it is self-published. The lack of sources prior to obituaries is a peculiar thing -- as if he suddenly became notable upon dying. During his lifetime he was well-known in U.S. chess circles, mainly for his showmanship, but because his actual chess strength didn't go much beyond the IM level, it might not be easy to find articles in the chess press celebrating his exploits. Bruce leverett (talk) 03:26, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Unquestionably notable. Emory Tate is an iconic figure, famous for his attacking play, and one of the strongest African-American chessplayers of all time. Maurice Ashley I believe is the only African-American grandmaster, and Emory Tate was one of the only (maybe the only?) African-American IMs. His notability is shown by the fact that ChessBase, Chess Life, and chess.com had obituaries of him (as Bruce leverett noted), and that Prof. Daaim Shabazz (of the famous "The Chess Drum" blog, who was recently honored by USCF) wrote an extensive biography of him. (Full disclosure: I was the proofreader of that biography, "Triple Exclam!!! The Life and Games of Emory Tate, Chess Warrior.") I am mystified by the nomination of this article for deletion, since no one has even advanced an argument why this article should be deleted. Krakatoa (talk) 15:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Minor correction: Stephen Muhammad is also an IM. Bruce leverett (talk) 17:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Emory Tate's notability is beyond question. (Disclosure: Tate and I were friendly acquaintances, not quite friends.) The Shabazz book, which I have read, handles source material well. Agree that the article itself needs polishing, but that's irrelevant to the AfD discussion. Billbrock (talk) 00:04, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Billbrock and Krakatoa. Notability standards are met and exceeded by a considerable margin. Numerous high quality sources with editorial oversight are cited in the reference section including Chess Life. In addition there is a well-researched obituary in ChessBase magazine. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:13, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All evidence of notability given is subjective. No verifiable evidence of notability. Popoki35 (talk) 13:18, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.