Talk:Turochamp

Turochamp has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 9, 2019. (Reviewed version).

Chess Low‑importance

	Chess portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChessWikipedia:WikiProject ChessTemplate:WikiProject Chesschess articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Wally Scharold (3 participants)
Cake Mania (series) (1 participant)
Omocat (4 participants)
Fortnite Chapter 5 Season 2: Myths and Mortals (9 participants)
SpongeBob SquarePants (disambiguation) (9 participants)
Stick Soldiers (2 participants)
Rick Jay Glen (4 participants; relisted)
Do You Like Horny Bunnies? (16 participants; relisted)
Atlus USA (15 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Turochamp/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Indrian (talk · contribs) 21:31, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Always on board for the early stuff. I will post a review sooner rather than later. Indrian (talk) 21:31, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: ping --Pres N 03:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, life got crazy again. If I don't review this next week, feel free to replace me. Indrian (talk) 15:58, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so much for sooner rather than later. Better late than never? Anyway:

Lead[edit]

"It was developed in the early history of video games" - I know you like to include this language as a way of tying this early game articles into the parent article, but in this case it feels really forced. These two were not even thinking about "video games" or entertainment; they just thought it would be cool if computers were smart enough to play chess.

History[edit]

It feels like there is a little bit of historical context missing here. Turing started pondering the concept of mechanizing the play of chess in conversation with Jack Good in 1941 while they were at Bletchley Park together and came up with many of the principles he would later incorporate into Turochamp such as assigning points to pieces and having the program analyze moves through the lens of decision trees and minimaxing. In 1943, he began refining his ideas with Donald Michie, who later created Machiavelli. He and Champernowne also had discussions on the matter in 1944. As written, the article does not give any indication that he had thought much about computers and chess before 1946.

Legacy[edit]

"After the initial recreation was unable to recreate Turing's simulated match against Glennie, several computer chess experts and contemporaries of Turing were consulted" - You tell the beginning of this story, but not the resolution of it, which is that they determined the "errors" were not found within the program but within Turing's attempt to do all the calculation by hand.

There may be one or two additional grammatical things to look at, which I can take the liberty of correcting myself, but those are the three major issues I see. None of them are too large, however, so I will place this nomination On hold while concerns are addressed. Indrian (talk) 20:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: Ok, I've now addressed these three points, I think, so this is ready for another look. Thanks! --Pres N 16:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: ping again. --Pres N 10:48, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the big project that has consumed my life for the last month is now finished, so I will wrap this up in short order. Indrian (talk) 03:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: bi-weekly ping. --Pres N 07:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I made a couple of really tiny tweaks, and now I feel its ready to go. Thank you for your patience as I got swamped by some real-world projects. Indrian (talk) 13:40, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]