Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Checkers 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 merge to Hans Multhopp. MBisanz ^talk 02:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checkers chess

Chess variant with no real notability. Mentioned in a book but does that really make it notable. Notability tagged since Oct 07. Spiesr (talk) 17:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

Unfortunately, there are Wikipedia editors who think literally, who think anything even mentioned in any encyclopedia of chess variants by Pritchard must be a solid gold reference. Notably, this was all due to the arbitrary judgment of one very old man (recently, deceased) who did not know how to use a computer. Some old games that are non-notable by modern standards and rarely played by anyone were known of by the few chess variant enthusiasts who existed in the era predating the explosion in the number of games invented, the internet, fast computers and multi-variant programs. I hope this non-notable game will be deleted but brace for the same mindless objections you see to other non-notable chess variants being deleted. By the way, said section is chock full of junk- some of it likely placed anonymously by the game inventors. -DavidWatersHC —Preceding undated comment was added at 20:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Speedy merge No reason to lose article history or contents (brief as they are). There is already an article on the author of this game variant and it can be included there. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, oh wow, I created this? I really wish I knew where I got the original content from since I was cleaning up from somewhere. I'd merge unless more content can be found. gren グレン 03:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an unnotable chess variant, and being confused with a newer also unnotable chess variant that uses the same name. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 04:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy merge I agree with the proposal to merge into the article on the author of this variant. In fact the article mentions two authors (apparently of unrelated variants), both of them have their own page so the contents of this one could be split between them - adding details about what is distinctive to each author's variant. (And maybe on eahc author's page say "see also (other author)" in the appropriate place.) Lessthanideal (talk) 16:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into chess variant Esasus (talk) 23:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Hans Multhopp SyG (talk) 23:18, 30 January 2009 (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.