Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chess (application)

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 no consensus. L Faraone 01:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chess (application)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is pretty much like the articles on the Windows games Chess Titans, Spider Solitaire (Windows) and Purble Place. It's a issue of ~~WP:NOTTEMPORARY~~ (actually, this should be WP:NOTINHERITED) and ~~WP:GAMEGUIDE~~, because I doubt there's any critical reviews or in-depth independent sources that we could find for this article, and the fact that it's part of the popular Macintosh computer won't even save this article for being non-notable. EditorE (talk) 01:07, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't think this article violates WP:GAMEGUIDE. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:13, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe not, but it's still not a notable-enough game to appear on Wikipedia either way. EditorE (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 04:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 04:33, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:NOTTEMPORARY cannot be a reason for deletion. It says that, once a topic has received enough coverage to be classed as notable, it doesn't need continued coverage to maintain that notability. (So, for example, a book that was widely reviewed in the 1970s doens't become non-notable just because nobody's said much about it in the last 30 years.) Dricherby (talk) 08:59, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, actually it's a good reason, because the fact that the Macintosh is a very notable computer does not make the game notable, and we wouldn't we need ongoing coverage of a Macintosh by making articles of computer games bundled with the computer. It's still a non-notable topic. EditorE (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The concept that notability of Macintosh doesn't make bundled software notable is WP:NOTINHERITED. Seriously, WP:NOTTEMPORARY has nothing to do with it. Dricherby (talk) 12:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 15:09, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. None of the deletion reasons given apply to this article, except for the apparent lack of critical reviews or independent sources, a WP:GNG concern. The question is whether the software has significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The answer may be no. Quale (talk) 17:53, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Theopolisme (talk) 01:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 12:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe all these small article Chess apps can be merged into this article? There are quite a few.NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 15:48, 16 July 2013 (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.