The result was delete. Guerillero Parlez Moi 16:50, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
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)
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)
The result was delete. Guerillero Parlez Moi 16:50, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
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)
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)