Single Comment

Well, I can't fault your reluctance to waste an existing page, but the
process still seems to not quite fire on all four cylinders. I tried a
similar change of tack after my round variant Voyager was thoroughly
slated, a with similar results (try pasting voyager after itemid=MS and
see what happens). Perhaps we should be pressuring the editors to make
changes in title - and editing a page's index details more than once -
work properly. Given the preference of many for 'quality over quantity'
they should be all in favour of making it easier for unpopular variants to
be replaced.
	As my lack of rating shows, I am not sure how to nullify a 'below
average'. I hear that a 'good' might overshoot! I need to analyse the
game a bit more before deciding whether I want to do that.
	Regarding your question about what I term these pieces, the answer is
that they are all a bit convoluted. The oblique one, had it the full
Knight move, would be the short-leap form of the NIGHTPIGEON. Without the
more-sideways moves it is therefore the short-leap form of the
NIGHTPIGRANKRON (the rank bit means moving more ranks than files).
Long-leap versions would be able to leap over the front two Knight
destinations. Wazir+forward Rook is the stepping form of the SOWON. This
means a Picket-style extension of Wazir+Dabbaba=SOW. The leaping Sow and
Sowon would again be able to leap the front Wazir destination. The other
two I did come up with names for but thought too obscure to include in the
articles at the time. Because they are akin to the obliqie Pigeon pieces
but a bit more than the analogues I term them the GOLDDOVE and SILVERDOVE
- which is which is hopefully obvious.