Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women in 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 Speedy close per WP:SNOW, not a deletion discussion. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Women in chess[edit]

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

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

I nominate the article, not for deletion, but for an outcome of Draftify per Talk:Women in chess#Article state CapnZapp (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CapnZapp (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CapnZapp (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. CapnZapp (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CapnZapp (talk) 16:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:SOFIXIT — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:24, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Clearly a notable topic, current poor state of the article is irrelevant. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 16:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Why not place maintenance tags on the article for "under construction" or "clean up" instead? Subject obviously passes GNG. Just because the article is not in great shape at this time is not a reason to delete or even draftify. There are lots of good sources that were posted to the article talk. And I imagine there is lots of interest in the subject. Netherzone (talk) 16:35, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Gimme a break. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I felt the article was in such bad state, with content basically just pilfered from elsewhere on Wikipedia, that nominating the article for draftifying was the only conscionable move to make, sending the "not cool" signal to the contributors. (I get the impression none of you have even read Talk:Women in chess#Article state) CapnZapp (talk) 17:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CapnZapp: I read the talk page (as mentioned above), what stood out to me was I saw all of the great sources Bluerasberry added there. I'm guessing that in time they will be added to the article. Netherzone (talk) 19:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep AfD is not cleanup. To the more specific concerns raised, it's worth noting that repeating content from other pages isn't necessarily a bad thing. There's nothing wrong with overview-type articles that consist of short-ish sections with "Main article" or "For details, see" notices. XOR'easter (talk) 19:16, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Retaliatory noms based on current pop culture or events someone can't stand (i.e. The Queen's Gambit) never go well for me. WP:SOFIXIT, tag it appropriately, and find something else to watch. Nate • (chatter) 21:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Women_in_chess&oldid=996355363"