Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of chess gambits


 * 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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) MaxBrowne2 (talk) 22:38, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

List of chess gambits

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Article is almost entirely unsourced, what sources it has are self-published. Article is WP:REDUNDANT as the material is better covered in the articles on the various chess openings. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. INDISCRIMINATE does not apply: there are a finite number of gambits, and they are analyzed into the ground. Each linked article appears to be well sourced (from perusing a sampling). Clarityfiend (talk) 07:34, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 08:29, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, tentatively - Could you explain how it is indiscriminate? Is "gambit" ambiguous in a way I'm unfamiliar with? There are many books specifically about gambits/opening gambits (I had a few when I was a kid, in my desperation to avoid boring openings). That makes me think it's likely this passes WP:NLIST. It being unsourced isn't great, but is it controversial that the Blackmar–Diemer Gambit is a gambit? &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 15:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Some sources showing WP:NLIST (all books):
 * Gambit Chess Openings by Eric Schiller
 * The Complete Book of Gambits by Raymond Keene
 * Gambit Openings Repertoire for Black by Schiller (there are other books in this series)
 * Alterman Gambit Guide: Black Gambits 2 by Boris Alterman (there are other books in this series)
 * Key Concepts of Gambit Play by Yuri Razuvaev
 * Squeezing the Gambits: the Benko, Budapest, Albin, and Blumfeld by Kiril Georgiev
 * Gambits and Flank Openings by Sipke Ernst and Geert van der Stricht
 * Gambit Play: Sacrificing in the Opening by Angus Dunnington
 * Open Gambits by George Botterill
 * The Gambit Guide to the Benko Gambit by Steffen Pedersen (there are other books in this series) &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 19:48, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of chess openings or Gambit. Some of these are openings with possible options that are gambits, that aren't discussed in the target article (the various Tarrasch Defense ones, for instance). power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 19:32, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * power~enwiki Would you object if I closed this as withdrawn by nominator? There is obviously a consensus to keep and it will save time. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:19, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That's fine. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 16:46, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per the above. I'm baffled how this can be described as "indiscriminate", and it's well verifiable or verified by sources at the articles on the specific gambits. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:30, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Not the greatest article in the world but the list can be defined by the entries in the ECO and sourced accordingly. Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree that it's not the best it can be — barely any information for a non-expert — but this is absolutely notable. I don't play chess but having read a single history book a decade ago, I can recognize a number of these.  Clear selection criteria, blue links for all the headers, and the list as a whole is certainly covered beyond just the individual items; that's a clear keep for a list. ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 20:56, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: Doesn't look like I'll get consensus here, but I'll note that the classification of some chess openings as "gambits" is inconsistent. The Queen's Gambit is not a true gambit because there is no good way for black to hold on to the pawn. On the other hand the Two Knights Defence is usually not labelled a "gambit" even though the main line after 4.Ng5 (the Knorre Variation) involves the sacrifice of a pawn by Black; the term "Two Knights Gambit" is not used in any of the books I've seen. The list also includes some very silly openings and names which you won't find in any standard opening reference, e.g. Halibut Gambit, Colorado Gambit, Lobster Gambit. (Eric Schiller's poorly regarded Unorthodox Chess Openings doesn't count). This is why WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC) Edit: Quoting Hooper and Whyld's Oxford Companion to Chess: "The most general terms are Variation, Gambit, Defence, Opening and Attack; less common are Counter-gambit, Counterattack, Game and System..... these terms are not ... used consistently and they afford no basis for classification". MaxBrowne2 (talk) 01:49, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a content issue, or inclusion criteria perhaps, but not a notability issue. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 01:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep perfectly valid list subject. Artw (talk) 04:02, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:LISTN. Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:34, 15 May 2018 (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.