Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chess.com (2nd nomination)
the sources seem borderline for general notability but regardless being the most popular chess site means the absence of a Wikipedia article is a downer to Wikipedia itself. It can't be the prevailing view to on one hand, to stress coverage of Wikipedia per the FA's on the main page, and at the other hand have an absence of this article. There are a number of commentaries that, to my mind, rightly raise an eyebrow at Wikipedia's previous absence of this article, the forum at chess.com itself but also an alternative encyclopedia. I can just see a journalist reporting, "Wikipedia's says they have broad coverage but in practice they don't even have an article on chess.com the world most popular chess site with over 8 million members, a site that is more active then Wikipedia itself." So to that end I say even if |ignore rules has to be applied, Keep it. Regards
— User:Sun, 13:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:IAR (Wikipedia:Ignore all rules)