Talk:Emory Tate

Died?

I am seeing reports on Facebook that he collapsed and died at a chess tournament, apparently on October 17, 2015. Krakatoa (talk) 06:55, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Also Twitter: https://twitter.com/search?q=emory%20tate&src=tyah Sounds like he did indeed die, sadly, so I have revised the article accordingly. Krakatoa (talk) 08:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Frustrating lack of sources so far, just twitter, facebook and a few blogs and forums. MaxBrowne (talk) 12:05, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

The current page is rife with many errors. His peak USCF rating was 2508. He did not "pick up" Spanish, but was an exchange student in Mexico during high school. The last move in Yudasin game was 36.Qg5 and not 36.Qh6. The majority of information is from one article. The entire profile needs to be rewritten with better sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.158.75 (talk) 00:30, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

There are much better sources than the articles cited. The Chess Drum website was not even cited when in fact, it was the main reservoir for biographical data on Emory. Few of the written sources used to refer to Emory Tate Jr. pre-date his death bringing into question the quality of the entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daaim777 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

There is no listing of this person in the US Chess Federation registry. Consigiliere (talk) 05:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I LOVE TATE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.144.227.201 (talk) 11:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

more info? Tristan Tate....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDUOJpk7FWQ is an interview of Tristan Tate, who claims to be younger son of Emory Tate, and while most info isn't pertinent to this article it does include info about Emory including a claim he refused his pension because he was accused of being crazy.(37:37) Stefan Molyneux is the interviewer major section about Emory starting around 33:08 talking about Tristan's family, 40:40 "what happened?" about Emory through 45 minutes.... but 57:20 has about 1 minute of info and a couple tid-bits thereafter... hopefully this will be useful --Qazwiz (talk) 20:16, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

The video is deleted -- do you have a backup archive, like maybe on wayback? 174.211.175.35 (talk) 18:29, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion Proposal

Any thoughts on deletion? I know the topic was originally brought up in a questionable manor, but I feel it does deserve discussion. I'm no stickler for notability requirements, but the sources do seem a bit suspect. CivilianArthur (talk) 15:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

A quick Google search has led me to believe he might meet notability requirements. However, in its current state this article has no source that has any reliability and I therefore agree with deletion (unless somebody extensively reworks the article with reliable sources). Supertowel (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

A prod is for uncontroversial deletions. For an International Master strength player AfD is a better venue. Sometimes they are deleted, sometimes not. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:39, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Fixed, thank you for correction. CivilianArthur (talk) 19:48, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

And Chess Life is a reliable source. Pawnkingthree (talk) 11:47, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Disclosure: I can't claim neutrality; Emory was a friend (though not a close friend). I would observe that if one is the subject of a biography (Daaim Shabazz's Triple Exclam!!!), one generally meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. Billbrock (talk) 16:16, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

That biography is self-published. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:18, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

It is. It's also got significant input from Grandmasters, and it's excellent. Billbrock (talk) 00:09, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't know the book author, how many sales it got etc. But it apparently claims that the Alabama State Senate passed a resolution acknowledging Emory Tate. Quick check on their site returns NO results for Emory Tate.

Most of the information is based on obituaries by friends & a book/articles by one friendly author. Hardly reliable sources!

Every day there are thousands of nicely written obituaries by friends & Thfamily members where hyperbole is often used. That's why we have Elo's system in chess to sort out the truth from human subjectivism.

He seems to have been a nice & passionate guy, but you don't get ranking points for being good at telling jokes...

The points & scores make you noteworthy in chess.

No matter how you spin it, 2400 FIDE rating is nowhere near enough to be taken as a serious noteworthy player at any adults pro chess tournament.

So, how does it make it enough to be noteworthy for Wikipedia? 213.231.141.32 (talk) 20:31, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

There was a clear consensus to keep when this article was nominated for deletion. Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion have nothing to do with Elo rating and everything to do with significant coverage in reliable sources. This article was assessed as meeting the criteria. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 22:40, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Is information provided by friends unbiased and thus reliable source of information?

Because the book & articles are written by friends.

One of the claims in the book doesn't go through fact checking - not reliable. In fact the book is written by a friend who has no other books & has no recognized expertise in chess, thus making them rather unreliable sources of information.

Articles are obituaries, obviously by friends & family.

If someone was noteworthy, they would have significant coverage in reliable sources for their achievements while they were alive. How come nobody was writing about this chess savant while still alive?

From the 17 sources(as one is duplicate), 10 are by his friendly book author, 2 are by his Chess.com friend likely the author of his profile there, 1 unknown author, 1 newsletter & 1 from an old article in a newspaper about school chess. Hardly a set of undisputably reliable sources.

While Elo ratings have nothing to do with Wikipedia's criteria, his rather abysmal 33% win rate at Chess.com deserves either a mention or at least a thought if such a chess player would get any coverage in any sources, unless he's very friendly with them. 213.231.141.32 (talk) 21:18, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you feel the need to denigrate his achievements. During his life time he was a very well known player who had significant coverage in publications such as Chess Life. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 02:06, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't, just stating facts/asking questions, but never getting concrete answers/data/links.

I have wild imagination, but I realllly struggle to imagine how 33% win rate & 2400 FIDE Elo can make anyone prominent.

Honestly, on Linkedin I got these offers - we can make you a Wiki page for your business blah blah blah... so, I add 1+1 and think not very nice things.

Anyone unbiased with a bit of chess knowledge will laugh at the idea of some 50 y.o. guy with such credentials having a page on Internet's Encyclopedia as a prominent chess player.

And again, why not add his Chess.com win rate to his profile? 213.231.141.32 (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

chess.com is hardly reliable or comprehensive, his USCF profile (listed in EL) gives a more accurate picture. Anyway if you fell that strongly about it you can start an AfD process but I doubt you'll get a different result. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 11:20, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

More information

After a quick google search of his name I found there is reasonable online presence to merit a Wikipedia page including two books that are written about him but by small time authors, so deleting the page completely wouldn’t be necessary. With that said, more notable achievements should be included to the page to extend the paragraphs such as any large wins in a chess tournament or any inventions or patents EnWikieditor (talk) 14:44, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

"Incomprehensible"

OK algebraic notation is not incomprehensible to chess players, but still I question the usefulness of this section. What about linking to the games at chessgames.com instead? Second best option after introducing a chess game playback feature such as is used in Hebrew wikipedia. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 13:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I would be ok with that, I really just object to the tagging, which is not accurate as notation is used widely across chess articles, obviously.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Why does it say right wing personality?

Why is it saying his son is a right wing internist personality with no source? 94.252.121.215 (talk) 00:28, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2022

Change the early life and education section by removing "rigth-wing" to describe Emory Tate's son Andrew Tate.

Reason: there is no source cited to support the claim that Andrew Tate belongs, supports or otherwise endorses any political party that could be associated with a rigth-wing ideology. Furthermore, very recently Andrew Tate himself said during an interview that he is ["apolitical"] stating ["I have so little faith in either side of the system, that I am now absolutely and utterly apolitical."]. (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZrwHLfWYIw [timestamp 0:10-0:24]) 2.138.123.77 (talk) 16:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. MadGuy7023 (talk) 07:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Celebrity friends

Brent Peterson 2601:844:8101:BF40:AD:94CE:A37D:A1B8 (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Andrew Tate as a source on chess

Is it appropriate to refer to Andrew Tate as a reference to his father's chess style, while it is considered notable that a player does not use computers to aid their preparation it does seem problematic to cite Andrew Tate as a source on this as he has a history of mythologising his father, on the other hand it seems unlikely that there exists another source on the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.188.107.177 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

This is also described by other sources, which are not merely paraphrasing his son. I think it's a nice quote, and probably better than trying to paraphrase it ourselves. DFlhb (talk) 02:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Chatted to Emory Tate a few times on ICC, and yeah he really was this larger than life WWE villain character. He did brag about never formally studying the game or using engines. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 05:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Emory Tate.webp

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Changed the picture back. DFlhb (talk) 02:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

BLP

Tate is still a relatively recently deceased person, and the recent prominence of his son makes the WP:BLP policy all the more relevant. If you're going to make claims that he had "narcissistic personality disorder" or whatever, you need rock solid sources. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 11:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

He's been dead for over seven years, so BLP no longer applies to him. WP:BDP says two years is the maximum one can reasonably extend the policy. But I agree that his son's YouTube channel is absolutely not a reliable source.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

What is African-American Chess?

Is this a different form of chess? The article mentions “African-American Chess” 2603:3024:E3C:C000:44A1:314C:BFEC:246D (talk) 01:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Ask Maurice Ashley, we're just quoting him. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 06:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

African Americans used to be practically absent from high-end chess; Ashley became the very first Black grandmaster in 1999, and was since followed by a number of others. That's what it means. DFlhb (talk) 06:21, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

'That' clearly isn't 'what it means' as there is no such form of chess, otherwise it would appear in the international chess federation rules. That one person uses a phrase does not define a new form of chess. That Wikipedia spots it demonstrates why it is not taken seriously as an encyclopaedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.236.54 (talk) 20:35, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

It's completely normal to say something like "Tony Miles was a major figure in English chess" and people will know exactly what you mean. Only annoying pedants would call you out and say "is English chess different from normal chess?". Ashley's reference to "African American chess" is the same thing. Besides, we're quoting him, not necessarily endorsing the term itself. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 04:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2023

Change “Christian Tate” to “Tristan Tate” 65.112.8.27 (talk) 23:38, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Corrected, not sure what happened there. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

@Pawnkingthree that's on me, i had a mental slip there, thought andrew tate referred to both brothers (for some reason)

n

Cash713 (talk) 14:30, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

also i forgot christians name Cash713 (talk) 14:49, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

tristan* Cash713 (talk) 14:49, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Daughter

Why are only his sons mentioned. His daughter might be embarrassed by her father's philandering behaviour and her brothers' ridiculous cult but she's a legitimate child! 161.142.158.55 (talk) 12:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Because she is not a public figure and has never sought the limelight, and under our policies (for example WP:BLPNAME), we exclude information that could lead to harm to such people (for example, harassment). We never imply that she is an illegitimate child; the infobox mentions 3 children, and she is one of the three. DFlhb (talk) 13:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2023

Remove controversial. It creates misguiding information TheOOWindow (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 18:04, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Why does it exist?

I find it incredible that someone with amateur level of chess success deserves an article in Wikipedia. In chess, the top 20-30 are pros. These are ppl living out of playing pro chess, then there are some more who are i.e. chess coaches. But nobody outside the top 100 is living out of chess. Meaning they work smth else & chess is a hobby. This Tate guy had a very low rating achieved fairly late in life, further proving he was an amateur player. Usually by 21-23 we know which players will be at the top, he was approaching over 50 when he was at his best! That's the case of an army guy playing chess as a hobby, but at no point he was ANYWHERE near close to be a professional player and thus worthy of being in the list of prominent International master chess prayers, let alone Grand Masters. Even at the time there were 100s of kids with higher rating. In 1999 Maurice Ashley became the first black player to become GRAND Master, this Tate guy managed to get International Master(of which there are thousands) only in 2007. It makes absolutely no sense why he has a chess player page, his achievements are of no significance whatsoever in the world of pro chess. 213.231.141.32 (talk) 02:29, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

he is the father of andrew tate. i bet elon musk's father has a page also. 154.238.216.135 (talk) 00:42, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

It's got nothing to do with who his son is. He has an article because he has significant coverage in reliable sources. His daughter, on the other hand, is not a public figure and so does not have an independent article. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 01:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Punctuation, Spelling, and Form

In the paragraph on CHESS, the last sentence of that paragraph, reads, "He received the international master tile in 2007,...." International Master should be capitalized. The fact that it is not capitalized, diminishes the honor. Specifically, when 'the' precedes 'international master' and is immediately followed by 'title', it is implicit that it is an honorary title which has a name. When International Master is capitalized it gives honor to the recipient; also to the organization giving the award, and to his peers who have gathered to honor him for his achievement. It is correct to capitalize International Master as it is a 'thing', it is a noun. CuriousLemming (talk) 20:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

He was known during his life time as Emory Andrew Tate Jr, not Emory Andrew Tate II

A tweet is not, of course, a reliabe source. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 06:08, 3 November 2023 (UTC)