Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawk (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 redirect to Fairy chess piece. redirects are cheap &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hawk (chess)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not have WP:RSs to satisfy WP:Notability for a stand-alone article. --IHTS (talk) 10:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: No acceptable sources or claims of notability; internet searches suggest that this is not just due to omission. --JBL (talk) 11:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Double sharp (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Brittle heaven (talk) 03:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Fairy chess piece where it is already listed.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * What is the test for notability there? This piece is not notable enough for its own article; how should one determine if it's notable enough to be in that list?  --JBL (talk) 16:55, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * We don't have to debate that here - it can be done at the talk page of the main article.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:18, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Won't the discussion closer need to see basis for your !vote to redirect in order to evaluate the !vote? AFAIK the only published ref that exists is this, and said ref didn't exist prior to 16 Feb 2017. --IHTS (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirects are cheap. Unless the Hawk is a complete hoax (which I don't think anyone has suggested) it's a plausible search term, so why not redirect? There could just be a brief mention there along the lines of, "lesser known examples include the hawk."--Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:33, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.