The tag wiki currently states, "This tag is for challenges related to chess or any derivative of it." This wording technically excludes games like Xiangqi (aka "Chinese chess"), which are part of the same family but aren't derivatives (more like cousins). If we're going to include fairy chess in the tag (e.g.), should we also include games that developed separately from European chess but share a common ancestor?

Sandbox post that inspired this question

Update: The tag wiki has now been edited.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Can you link to a genealogical tree of chess so that we know how broad "share a common ancestor" is? \$\endgroup\$ Sep 4, 2016 at 7:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ @PeterTaylor Wikipedia and Google haven't turned up such a picture. However, it should be easy to draw one from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_chess and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaturanga. TL;DR: it is probable that chaturanga (India) was the ancestor of xiangqi (China), janggi (Korea), shogi (Japan), sittuyin (Myanmar), makruk (Thailand), and chatrang (Persia). Chatrang became shatranj in the Arab world and spread from there to Europe, becoming chess. (Some further regional and historical versions are listed in the link in my answer.) \$\endgroup\$
    – DLosc
    Sep 5, 2016 at 1:56
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ One possibly helpful quote in determining which games fall in the chess family, from the history of chess article: chaturanga "is the earliest known game to have two essential features found in all later chess variations—different pieces having different powers (which was not the case with checkers and Go), and victory depending on the fate of one piece, the king of modern chess." \$\endgroup\$
    – DLosc
    Sep 5, 2016 at 1:59

1 Answer 1


Both derivatives and cousins of chess should be included

It makes sense for other games that are closely related to chess to be included in the tag. I propose the following wording for the header of the tag wiki:

This tag is for challenges related to chess or any variation on chess.

The longer description can be edited in the same way. It may be helpful to provide a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_variants for clarity.

  • \$\begingroup\$ I have suggested an edit concerning that. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 4, 2016 at 19:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ I support this wording. Additionally, should it become necessary, we can create tags for specific variants of chess, and mention in the tag wiki that those tags should be used (a la math). \$\endgroup\$
    – user45941
    Sep 4, 2016 at 23:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ I like your wording in your comment on the question. I think it would be useful to have something along those lines in the tag wiki, so it's more objective. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 7, 2016 at 8:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @trichoplax I was close to adding it, but the problem is that it doesn't apply to all modern chess variants. For instance, Losing Chess doesn't treat the king differently from any other piece; you win simply by losing all your pieces. \$\endgroup\$
    – DLosc
    Sep 7, 2016 at 15:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .