How can you deliver checkmate with a king?

Uh, yes. I do seek refuge with the dictionary. As do most people. You can define words however you like, I will choose to seek refuge with the dictionary. That's where I get the definitions for pretty much all words.

And I agree with the rules because they are what govern this topic. The rules say both that a checkmate is an attack on an enemy kings square from which there is no escape and they also say that a move may produce a checkmate. I agree 100%. Just like the other examples we had. The entity that is in the way does not DELIVER the result. It move out of the way so something else can deliver the result. Deliver. Yes, I seek refuge with the dictionary about what deliver means. So would any judge, jury, or arbitrator deciding what words mean.

Untrue again. A discussion on causation and delivery can be about "entire positions" to show there is a better "delivery candidate" than a single piece in the checkmate state but it is not part of the definition of checkmate. As I said a million times "delivery" is about communication and not about checkmate/stalemate/... rules. And I clearly acknowledged that FIDE and USCF assigned delivery to the "checkmating move", not to the "entire position". Which is also simpler when describing delivery for all "states".

You can say it a million more times if you like. It doesn't change what the rules say and what the dictionary says. You did in fact ramble on several times about "entire position" when trying to describe checkmate. Which is fine, but that's nowhere to be found in the rules or in the dictionary. It's your opinion, which is fine. But ultimately decisions about something aren't determined by your opinion (I could have the opinion the moon is made out of cheese). Ultimately decisions are achieved by the rules and the definition of words.

This isn't a court of law where a judge or jury gives their opinion. But if it were, I'm pretty sure they'd want to see the rules and, if necessary, the definition of the words being used.

The rules say a move may result in a checkmate POSITION. A checkmate position can ONLY be end of the game if there is an attack on the enemy kings square and there is no escape. That position IS the attack. (much like the archer aiming the arrow or the purple car speeding into the blue car). The enemy king doesn't get captured or killed. It's the ATTACK (again in the rules) that delivers the checkmate.

The king gets out of the way (just like the other entities that get out of the way in our other examples). By doing so it reveals the attacking (or checkmating) piece. It is that attacking piece that delivers checkmate. Not the piece that gets out of the way of the attack.

No, you don't seek refuge in the dictionary to understand the text. And you are not free to bend it in a way which conforms to some dictionary meaning of your choice. You never ever ever are. The duty of the reader is always to understand the writer which implies an intelligent use of dictionaries, a knowledge of (his) contexts, a concept of realities - or an expedition to the arctic if that is needed.

You live in the language paradigm - a severe illness I can write a book about. May be one day I will.

The language paradigm in full display. Completely ridiculous confusing the state of checkmate with the action of checkmating, again and again and again and again .....

OMAE 2 MONTH CONVO OF DIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIS

Yes.

king move checkmate in spell chess

This isn't what we are talking about.

Famous Emanuel Lasker Game:

Castling to give the checkmate would have been nice, but kd2 looks cooler on the scoresheet!

Kd2# makes it look like the king delivered the mate lol

Edit: jeez all this arguing in such a peaceful chess topic lol

BTW, it was Edward Lasker, not the world champion!

It's like delivering a checkmate by a discovered check, displacing your king to reveal a piece behind him.

,,

Hurray! We made the 400 mark!

That would be stalemate unless you succeed in doing it while delivering a discovered check. The latter is pretty rare!

That is a recipe for checkmating a king with a king and a queen but it has nothing to do with the subject of this topic which is: "Delivering checkmate with a king".

its checkmate already

In this case, the checkmate is caused by the king. Thus, delivering checkmate with the king.