I've created the present template which is meant as a simple ease-of-use navigational aid for a specific topic: the first twenty possible, legal moves in chess. All twenty of these have their own existing articles (and names!), and such a well-defined set, having all relevant articles already-existing, strongly suggests that a simple navbox for the grouping is both warranted and helpful to the encyclopedia, where none previously existed. There are certain sections throughout the encyclopedia which touch on the subject, especially Irregular_chess_opening#Examples, but these are scattered mentions. A navbox can serve to unify the set.
At the same time, I am aware that most of the involved articles are of low importance, since they often describe uncommon openings. With all this in mind, my view is that the present template should stand on its own, and should not be integrated into Template:Chess. In other words, I think it's appropriate to have a template which collects notable, well-defined curiosa (it ought to exist), but trying to merge the current template into the main chess template would dilute and over-burden the latter (but it's not so important that it should burden the more important chess content within the encylopedia).MinnesotanUser (talk) 05:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2021-04-26T05:07:00.000Z","author":"MinnesotanUser","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-MinnesotanUser-2021-04-26T05:07:00.000Z-Rationale_for_Table_Creation_(existence,_and_distinction_from_main_Chess_Navbox)","replies":[]}}-->
