Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gravity chess

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 delete. Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 16:50, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gravity chess

[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)

There is a thing called "gravity chess", as explained in this article. However, the game described in this article (and in the images) is not that version, but some new version which doesn't have any reliable sources to support it. If an article for the "real" gravity chess should exist, then WP:TNT comes into play; better to start from scratch than to start from an article which from the very start was about the "wrong" version. Fram (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned in my edit history, this article was modeled after other variant articles such as Balbo's game, Cross chess, Double chess, Masonic chess, Rhombic chess, Alice chess, Apocalypse (chess variant), Chad (chess variant), Congo (chess variant), Jeson Mor, Andernach chess, Beirut chess, Checkless chess, Cubic chess, Hostage chess, Losing chess, Legan chess... I could keep going. There seems to be nothing specifically or unusually bad about this article, except that it doesn't have a reference in Pritchard. Oeoi (talk) 15:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Delete unless someone can find a genuine reliable source relating to this variant of chess. When the only reliable source in an article refers to something different that has the same name, there is a big problem. Google searches come up with a third thing, different again, also called Gravity chess, a sort of balancing plastic board that tips: [1]. We need several secondary sources unconnected with the originator, and reliable, before we can write anything. Elemimele (talk) 16:14, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect per nom. I saw this article yesterday, and wanted to draftify or nominate it to AfD. There's no more refs that can be found on Google, News, Books, and so on. Firstly, it does seem that the article has WP:OR, I suppose its history section, The idea of "falling pieces" in chess variants is often traced back to the development of online chess, where boards on a screen are often displayed "vertically". Early variants of gravity chess, such as Pippin Barr's version, developed in 2019, had gravity act in the direction of increasing files, and pawns did not serve as anchors. This variant, however, led to draws most of the time, tries to explain the new version with rules change, but with a single ref that's probably the worst SPS I ever saw (can't believe a website made in 2022 would be so bad) with no about us or policies whatsoever that also fails to explain the new version. Then there's this source, I suppose it's so poor, we don't even need to debate if it's an RS or SIGCOV. Considering that the game's very similar to the entry of the article at List of chess variants (though that's an older version, this is a newer one with rules change), we could redirect this, but I prefer deletion slightly. Considering the OR and poorness of the article, there isn't much to merge, I've already added the single ref counting to GNG in the list article. Therefore, I don't support a merge, and would agree for deletion per nom or redirecting. VickKiang (talk) 04:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. If the PC Gamer article isn't about the described game there is not even the barest glimmer of notability here. Not even notable enough for listing at List of chess variants. Many of the variants listed by Oeoi could do with serious consideration of deletion as well, there are far too many of these articles. --LukeSurl^t c 20:13, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge something (based on the PC Gamer, which is RS) to Chess variant (or the list). I was going to ping User:LukeSurl but they already noticed this. Luke - really, nothing to rescue here? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to lose any sleep if List of chess variants keeps the Gravity chess line that was added recently. But that list is a bit of a dumping ground for variants with little or no evidence of substantial play and could do with cleanup. LukeSurl^t c 12:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
redirect look like enough sourcing for the redirect. Hobit (talk) 14:28, 3 August 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.