Deletion of Three-check chess

Comment: noting that all of the content that is presently in the stand-alone article is probably fair game for merger, as it's not a terribly excessive amount of information.  Even if we ignore for the moment that this article is unsourced and fails  (no, a set of rules posted on a website are not RS for the purposes of establishing otability), this would still be a pretty straightforward OPAGE/ analysis, as I see it
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:N||WP:NOPAGE||WP:SUMMARYSTYLE)

Comment: after getting a little distracted by all the yelling about which sources are reliable, and how we should |interpret a source ''not'' saying something, I am now convinced by the areguments that this isn't individually notable. A mention at List of chess variants#Unorthodox rules on a standard 8×8 board is all that's necessary
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)