English Wikipedia @ Freddythechick:Articles for deletion/Free Internet Chess Server
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by imported>MalnadachBot at 06:59, 6 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 06:59, 6 February 2022 by imported>MalnadachBot (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Free Internet Chess Server
I'd like to think the subject of this article is notable, but unfortunately no one has come forth with any independent third-party sources since the article was tagged as needing them in April 2008. Anyone? Psychonaut (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - it is certainly highly notable in chess circles. One of the biggest chess sites [1], one of the oldest servers[2],described as one of the top three chess servers[3], widespread coverage[4], and even references in learned papers[5]. Arguably the most highly respected chess site, Chessbase, states "The Free Internet Chess Server is where it all started. Just about every major chess server used the FICS kernel as its code base." [6] Bridgeplayer (talk) 01:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Bridgeplayer appears to have everything right (except the game he plays). Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. Nifboy (talk) 01:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep The widespread coverage[7] in so many books is convincing. SunCreator (talk) 14:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Speedy keep One of THE oldest internet chess servers deserves a better fate than deletion. It certainly is notable enough, plus the diffs provided above should be enough for sourcing issues. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 21:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep, per Bridgeplayer. GrandMattster 21:35, 26 January 2010 (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.