Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanley Random Chess (2nd nomination)

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 restore to userspace at User:Gregorytopov/Stanley Random Chess per section B4 of WP:UP/RFC2016. JohnCD (talk) 21:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a joke chess variant implemented on a single chess web server where half of the player's moves are automatically rejected at random with funny messages, but players joke about these funny messages being real rules. This article and its unreliable sources all appear to have been written in this same style ("fewer legal moves than traditional chess", "rules are too complex to summarize"). The edit history alleges that "Gregory Topov" is a fictional character. I can't find any secondary sources that have written about the game for what it is.

The article was AfD'd in 2006 and userfied, and later blanked. The userfied page was put up for MfD by User:Legacypac in February 2016 on the grounds that it was now a blanked hoax with possible copyvio text in the history, but when the MfD was closed as keep, Legacypac unblanked it and brought it back to primetime explaining "This survived MfD so should be moved back into mainspace" McGeddon (talk) 13:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (restore to Userspace) -- This is a hoax. The article text suggests that it WAS a hoax, but is now real... okay, I can buy that an online server installed this "variant" as a joke, but... it's not notable. There's no reliable sources that discuss it. Failing WP:GNG, it does not belong in mainspace. Go ahead and put it back into userspace where it belongs. Fieari (talk) 05:17, 28 June 2016 (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.