Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centaur (chess)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 'merge' to either Fairy chess piece or Advanced chess. Location can be decided editorially. There is no consensus to delete, nor to keep this as a standalone. Star Mississippi 02:51, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Centaur (chess)[edit]

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

Centaur (chess) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I proposed this article for deletion 5 years ago. Since then, there has been 0 substantive improvement. There is one source in the article, which appears to be an undiscerning aggregator of invented chess variant pieces, and I do not believe other sources exist. Certainly this is not the most notable thing named "Centaur" related to chess: that seems to be either a commercial chessboard computer or the notion described in our article Advanced Chess. As User:DGG suggested when un-prodding, merging to fairy chess could be considered. JBL (talk) 12:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. JBL (talk) 12:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • merge with Fairy chess piece as a unnatural chess piece (please inform me if this is incorrect) -just a quick reminder,Im really bad at this(talk)- 14:14, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Fairy chess piece. Not significant enough on its own to have a stand alone article, but fairy chess is clearly a notable topic. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 14:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If one goes to fairy chess piece one finds that this is supposed to be a piece from H. G. Albers' 1821 chess variant named Courier-Spiel. But that piece was named the Counsellor/Councillor (Cazaud & Knowlton 2017, pp. 269–270 Verney 1885, p. 154), not the Centaur. It is no wonder that people haven't been able to expand this. It has the wrong title, the wrong description, and even the wrong symbol. Why would we want to merge this when it's wrong in almost every way?
    • Cazaux, Jean-Louis; Knowlton, Rick (2017). "Fairy pieces on board". A World of Chess: Its Development and Variations through Centuries and Civilizations. McFarland. ISBN 9780786494279.
    • Verney, George Hope (1885). "The Courier-Spiel, H. G. Albers, Lünenburg, 1821". Chess Eccentricities. London: Longmans, Green & Company.
  • Uncle G (talk) 14:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment it is already on the fairy chess page, so i was saying merge because that might have fix the issue, but redirect might work. should i change to redirect? -just a quick reminder,Im really bad at this(talk)- 15:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge This thing is way too obscure for an article. ISaveNewspapers (talk) 02:12, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Fairy chess piece per WP:ATD.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Advanced chess. I don't think Fairy chess piece can be a good redirect target, given Uncle G's point above. XOR'easter (talk) 05:33, 16 February 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Centaur_(chess)&oldid=1073312503"