Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sicilian Defence, Accelerated Dragon


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Sicilian Defence, Accelerated Dragon

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article should be merged (WP:BLAR) with Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation since the article is somewhat short. Also, the openings are similar enough. Mast303 (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 00:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment this is a rather unhelpful AfD as the subject is already being discussed at the talk page of Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation where currently the proposer has proposed the merge, and two editors have disagreed; there is currently no support for the merge there. I would recommend discussing this in one place only. Elemimele (talk) 17:53, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Incorrect AfD. The Talk page for Sicilian Defence, Dragon Variation explains that Accelerated Dragon and Dragon Variation are completely different styles of play, which means that this article should be included in main Sicilian Defence which it already IS. This article must be kept as a standalone expansion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MitYehor (talk • contribs) 21:33, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Although some transpositional possibilities exist between these two opening variations, they are considered to be different variations. For instance, they have different ECO codes: the Accelerated Dragon is B34-B39, and the Dragon proper is B70-B79. This situation is similar to how the Modern Defence is considered to be different from the Pirc Defence, even though transpositions between the two are possible. There is more than enough literature on both the Dragon and the Accelerated Dragon to justify separate articles. Cobblet (talk) 23:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems an unnecessary AfD as the nominator is not asking for deletion but making the same merge proposal that they did on the talk page recently. In any event, I disagree with the need to merge. The most popular chess defense of them all, there is such a vast amount of literature on the Sicilian that it makes sense to have separate articles on all the major variations. The Accelerated Dragon is distinct enough from the Dragon that I do not think a merger would be helpful. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. They're different animals. Agree w/ other keeps. --IHTS (talk) 08:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per WP:CSK#1. There is a difference between a merge and a BLAR, and the nominator has given their rationale for a merge, but they have not provided any arguments that would support deletion, userfying or redirection instead. They are making an argument that supports an alternative action such as moving or merging, meaning that this should be speedy closed as keep. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 14:34, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article subject is sufficiently notable to merit a separate article without the proposed merge. Shawn Teller (talk) 22:12, 7 March 2023 (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.