Talk:Taikyoku shogi

the divine sparrow's movement is mirrored with that of the divine turtle, thus Ï propose we change rhis ambiguity. this is also due to the fact that the divine turtle itself has ñœ ambiguity, & that is why we should only believe the first diagram. -evanangelo

The Pieces and their Movements

I'd like to piont out that all of the piece movements have been verified using a Japanese source, a playable Java game, before the article was posted. The Japanese wiki had not been used as a sourse at that time nor have any English sources been used for the verification of piece movements. I'm stuck in Alaska for a few weeks on buisness but I will look into it as soon as I can. --JTTyler, 3 Oct 2005.

Thanks, JT. I'm verifying Tai shogi with Japanese wiki and have started posting inconsistancies on the Japanese pages. Once that's done, it should be easy to extend to maka, and then all articles will be in sync with the Japanese pages except taikyoku and ko shogi. I would much appreciate it if you took over confirming taikyoku! (And of course if you could resolve any of the outstanding issues on the other pages.) kwami 03:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm back! I've started on this page but I may not post the changes untill I'm about done. All of the non-promoted pieces have been verafied with jp wiki with allmost no change. The pronounciation guides are also a big help. --JTTyler 5 Nov 2005

Good. That helps. I adjusted about a quarter of the names. I'm afraid one or two may have slipped by, but this should be good for now. kwami 08:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I noticed that the stone chariot and soldier swap places on the board in the Japanese wiki. This seems to make more sence so I may make this change. I've also noticed the earth dragon's moves are reversed. My previous sorce may have been mistaken. Their are 300 types of pieces when you include promotions, however many pieces coppy the movements of others', hence 253 different moves. JTTyler 6 Nov 05.

(Note to readers: the stone chariot and soldier have been reversed, and both variants are now listed for the earth dragon.) kwami

It would be nice if we could transfer the diagrams for the piece movements from the Japanese wiki. TensaiKashou 21:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

You can! They're written in html, which works perfectly well here. Just cut 'n paste. 300 pieces are a bit much, but if each of us took 30, it would eventually get done. kwami (talk) 22:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

new draft

Hi JT,

Comments on the new draft:

You have the jumping order for the flying pieces as

1. King, crown prince
2. Great general
3. Vice general
4. Rook general, bishop general
5. Violent dragon, flying crocodile
6. All other pieces

However, Japanese wiki fuses 4 & 5 for

1. King, crown prince
2. Great general
3. Vice general
4. Rook general, bishop general, Violent dragon, flying crocodile
5. All other pieces

Under 'area movers' you say that the lion and lion hawk can only capture once per turn.

What you list as 'limited range multiple capture/partial lion power' pieces are just jumpers according to Japanses wikipedia. The golden bird, fire bird, and great elephant jump the first 0 to 3 squares (without capture), and then continue as ranging pieces in the directions you list for multiple capture. However, the ancient dragon has a ranging jump (flies) in the foreward & backward orthogonals, without capturing anything it jumps. (Like the generals in tenjiku.)

kwami 19:37, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Because I still have some difficulty reading Japanese, I based many of the rules on material I could find, including the Java game. Some are errors I still need to address. Primarily, v2.0 fixes most of the formatting issues; I even discovered that I had left a couple piece movements out of the original article. Further proofing and normalization of promoted pieces still need to be done so expect a v2.1. Thanks a lot for your input, it is helpful as always. JTTyler 22:20, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, Japanese wiki isn't necessarily correct either. I've just proofed the first rank, and am making adjustments. Actually, for the golden bird etc. it doesn't say they can jump up to the third square, it says that they can jump up to three pieces, which could be very different, depending on how literally we take it. (Is it a ranging jump, potentially crossing the board? Do the pieces have to be adjacent? If there is no adjacent piece, can it still jump one on the second square? Etc.) I translated it literally, leaving it ambiguous, so this is one we might want to confirm. (Of course, any source we get might be more precise than the original documents warrent.) kwami 21:54, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree, though it reminds me of the cannon from Xiangqi. JTTyler 10:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that would make it an interesting piece.

Actually, I think you're right. If it could jump to the second to fourth square, it would probably show that specifically on the diagram. The fact that the jump is indicated with a numeral 3 suggests that it is something that cannot be readily shown in a simple diagram.

Proofed the second rank. One possible correction, for the wooden dove, involves an error in Japanese wikipedia. I've changed our account to the Japanese verbal description, as that makes more sense given the promotions. I only noticed this because I read the Japanese for complex moves, but rely on the diagrams for basic ones, so there may be other discrepancies like this that I haven't caught. kwami 00:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Third rank: Phoenix & kirin masters cannot move on after jumping according to Japanese wiki. It only says,

また、斜め前 (or 前と後ろ) には3マス目まで飛び越えて行ける。

Also changed bishop & rook generals and croc to range capturing pieces, and added proviso that no such pieces can jump a royal. Substantially changed the croc and rain demon. Might be a good idea to verify with your sources and and variant movements if necessary.

Fourth rank: odd change in the silver chariot. there are seldom disagreements in simple pieces like this.

Fifth rank: the teacher king has no lion power in taikyoku. It instead has a 3-piece jump. The mountain stork agrees with the diagram, but not with the japanese text, which doens't mention moves to the side: 前後と斜め前に何マスでも動け (forward-backward and diagonally forward...)

Sixth: added a couple warnings. It doesn't make sense to me that the tengu and capricorn should have the same move, but that's what japanese wiki says. Also, the kirin is limited compared to Chu, but the phoenix is not. Just noticed by chance that one of the promotions was wrong: the flying goose promotes to sparrow's wings, not dragon king. Haven't checked any of the other pieces, though, so this needs to be done.

Can you double check poisonous snake? No jump move per japanese wiki. I'm just changing it on the assumption that what you had was the move of a smaller board version.

The royal proviso was in the text above the individual pieces, it was accidentally deleted.

Note (may not have time to confirm): The (3) in J-wiki probly means it can jump up to the first three squares, not up to three pieces at any distance. kwami (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

If it was "the third square", it would look like this.

＼				│				／
	☆			│			☆
		＼		│		／
			＼	│	／
	○	○	○	▲	○	○	○
			○	│	○
		○		│		○
	○			│			○

OosakaNoOusama (talk) 20:50, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Reference

As stated in the second paragraph “Several documents describing the game have been found; however, there are differences between them.” This may be the cause for some of our headaches. I liked the Java game because the piece movements where easer to define, however, it may not be as reliable a source as I thought, or it may be based on a different document than the jp.wiki. I have noticed some of the piece movements are reversed or different all together. Promotions may be affected also. The game is never updated so some of the info may be old.

A set of scans from Sekai no Shogi by Isao Umebayashi, a Japanese book about shogi variants, published in 1997 by Shogi Tengokusha, is archived at the Shogi Variants Group at onelist.com. The scans include diagrams and some explanations of the moves of the various pieces, as well as the initial setup. To view these, it is necessary to register with onelist. Of course, this information is never updated and may be based on only one document.

I got an expert, Colin Adams, to help with tenjiku shogi. The expert to ask for taikyoku is George Hodges. He posts to the Yahoo shogi club but I don’t know his E-mail address. I’m not a member of onlist or the Yahoo club but it might be worth taking a look.

Update: I have an address; george.hodges@talk21.com but I don’t know if it is current. Same with the address; George F. Hodges P.O. Box 77 Bromley, Kent BR1 2WT England Tel. (44) 81 - 468 7050, Fax (44) 81 - 295 1550.

It might be nice to get a copy of his booklet: George F. Hodges, Rules for historic Shogi variants. It can be ordered from the address above, though I can’t be sure if taikyoku is in it. JTTyler 14:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference! I'm fairly certain that taikyoku is not in Hadges pub, as that's fairly old. kwami 19:59, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean in Yahoo! groups? Houston-chess is the only one I see. kwami 21:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Divide and concur

It has come to my attention that User:-Ril- (one of the more prolific editers of article space) or one of his bots, belives that this article is too long on the basis of the limitations of obsolete web browsers (IE 6.0 and Firefox not among them). Therefore, when I get to it, I may divide this article accordingly. One of the visual tables will be greatly expanded and two of the textual tables will be integrated, creating at least one new article. It will be some time before this happens, unless someone else wants to assume this daunting task, so opinions may be left here to conciliate the suitability of doing this. JTTyler 02:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

User:JTTyler is indifferent –

User:Kwamikagami seams to like it as is –

User:-Ril- or one of his bots, votes to devide the article -

TheLateDentarthurdent suggests we divide the article by pieces or category of pieces since most of the information is regarding the movement of the ungodly number of pieces required to play. Category suggestions include Jumping, Diagonal, Orthogonal, Mixed Diagonal and Orthogonal, Mixed Jumping Diagonal and Orthogonal, etc. Or categorize them by row, which leaves only eleven sub-articles or so.

Keep it as it is. Splitting it into subarticles will make it more confusing, not less.

Since the template was added so long ago, and since noone ever split this article, I have removed the template. Did I mention that the editor who put the template in has since been banned? Samboy 19:05, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

NotAUser:Virgil wonders why we would even worry about the article being uncomfortably long and difficult to navigate when that more or less describes the nature of the game the article is about anyway. I vote we take the cautionary header off- anyone who is reading the article on Taikyoku knows full well what they're getting into. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.223.82.46 (talk) 06:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Capitalisation and Japanese

I think the names of the pieces should be capitalised, Looks a little more 'right', don't you think? Furthermore, I think the Japanese names should be added next to the English names (perhaps with furigana) for more comfort. I would certainly find it more comfortable for a learner (all the pieces have Japanese names on them). Siúnrá (talk) 17:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

We don't capitalize the pieces of ortho-chess.

You mean adding the Japanese to the English in the piece description section? I've done that with other articles, but this one is so long ! — kwami (talk) 17:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The piece movements

You should use diagram description.--119.108.116.221 (talk) 09:31, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Problems with a few pieces

The move description for the following one is inconsistent (what does it do orthogonally forwards) and I haven't any sources to repair it:
Raiding falcon

* Step: The raiding falcon can move one square orthogonally forward or sideways.
* Range: It can move any number of free squares in a straight line orthogonally forward.

Note that the corresponding piece in Wa shogi looks different from this piece in any possible interpretation and/or correction. 84.165.213.139 (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

L. Lynn Smith has a step diagonally forward. So I plug this one in. 134.96.51.209 (talk) 08:59, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

The next one looks inconsistent for another reason.
Bird of paradise and multi general

* Range: The bird of paradise and multi general move as a white horse.

The standard white horse known from other large shogi variants is indeed a ranging only piece. However, Taikyoku shogi's white horse is different and has some limited range move, too. So to which white horse are these two pieces equal? 84.165.213.139 (talk) 19:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a problem here, the moves given for the White Horse are ranging.134.96.51.209 (talk) 08:59, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

edit suggestion

Why not move the legend use for the layout into the table of names of pieces? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.53.193.68 (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect names?

I've noticed that some pieces are listed with the same Japanese name ... Great Turtle and the Great Standard as "daiki"? Earth General and Longbow General as "doshō"? (Doshō is given as the name for Earth General in Tai Shogi.) Roc and Phoenix Masters as "hōshi"? Lance and Strong Chariot as "kyōsha". (Kyōsha is given for Lance in other variants.) Blind Tiger and Savage Tiger as "mōko". (Looking at other variants I see that they are both listed as mōko there as well for some reason.) Blind Bear and Violent Bear as "mōyū". (Tai shogi has both of these and it's listed the same there as well.) Rain Demon and Woodland Demon as "rinki". Divine Turtle and Forest Demon as "shinki". Little Standard and Little Turtle as "shōki". Water General and Multi General both as "suishō". (In Tenjiku the Multi General is listed as suishō.)

Should there be some kind of vowel marks to differentiate them from each other, or did something get copied over incorrectly?

I imagine they all have the same answer as you erased for the first one: they're pronounced the same. Off hand, it looks like at least 7 out of 10 are. — kwami (talk)

I've also noticed the following inconsistencies ... Why is the 鳩槃 ("kyūhan") called a Wooden Dove, when in Tai and Dai Dai the same kanji and japanese name is used, but it's just called a Dove there? The Yasha in Dai Dai and Maka Dai Dai is listed as She-Devil and uses the same kanji and Japanese name. Shouldn't it be called She-Devil here as well? The Front Standard (前旗 "zenki") is listed in Tai and Dai Dai as Standard Bearer and uses the same kanji and Japanese name. TKR101010 (talk) 02:25, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

In those versions there was only one dove and one standard, so there was no need to dab; here there are several.

"She-devil" isn't a good translation. It was linked to yaksha as the most common English name, and I changed the text now to reflect that. — kwami (talk) 05:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Kind of straying from the original interpretation of the subject, but still in the interest in piece names ...

Yaksha is a common English name? I don't think many English speakers would know what a Yaksha is if you asked them.

It seems more logical to me to keep some kind of standardization between the different variants. (ie. If a piece uses the

same kanji and has the same move in more than one variant, then call it the same thing in both variants) On the flip side,

I also understand wanting to name things as close as possible to what the native words actually mean, like the choice of

"Free Dream-Eater" over "Free Tapir". But then I don't understand why we call a 変狸 an "Enchanted Badger" instead of a "Tanuki",

and a 天狗 a "Long Nosed Goblin" instead of a "Tengu". I think more English speakers would know what those two are than they

would a Yaksha. Another piece I've always felt was strangely named is calling a 獅鷹 a "Lion Hawk" instead of a "Griffin".TKR101010 (talk) 03:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Game play ...

"A move consists of moving a single piece on the board and potentially promoting that piece or displacing (capturing) an opposing piece." should probably be changed to "A move consists of moving a single piece on the board and potentially displacing (capturing) an opposing piece, promoting that piece if it is able to promote." The current wording implies that a piece can promote without capturing, which isn't possible in a promotion-by-capture game. The suggested way states that the moving piece (regardless of what it is) has the potential of capturing, and that if the piece is able to promote it will (since promotion-by capture is compulsory) but accepts that not all pieces will promote (since the moving piece may be of a sort that doesn't promote, or because it's already been promoted).TKR101010 (talk) 06:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Not a single source?

Neither the English, or the Japanese article (assuming some of the information is taken from it) list any sources, only few external links at the end. Shouldn't this be corrected? Theon144 (talk) 11:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

There is no more .swf link, either 93.184.91.24 (talk) 22:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

It has been moved to http://taikyokushogi.pv.land.to/taikyoku.html and http://taikyokushogi.pv.land.to/taikyoku.swf. OosakaNoOusama (talk) 20:55, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Range-capturing pieces

Hi, I have two questions about the range-capturing pieces (great general, vice general, etc.).

• They are said to capture all the pieces they jump over, does it really include the friendly ones (as the phrase implies)?
• Can they capture by displacement like the other pieces?

UseresuUK (talk) 19:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

No and no (I think). Double sharp (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

The correct answers are yes and yes. OosakaNoOusama (talk) 04:59, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Source please? Would be really interested. I'm planning to add Betza notation to this article at some point and this will change it slightly (and I need to make up a new symbol for friendly fire, also known as the ability to capture friendly pieces). Double sharp (talk) 13:45, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

It is probably no more reliable than our own convictions, but on this page they seem to have answered by ‘yes’ and ‘no’ (that is, range-capturing pieces capture also the friendly pieces they jump over, but they cannot capture by displacement) – just try to move, for instance, the great general. Well, in fact it is slightly more complicated: the great general (as well as the other range-capturing pieces) does have the ability to capture by displacement, but only when the move does not involve a range capture. UseresuUK (talk) 07:07, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, since taikyoku is super inconsistent with everything below, I'll exercise my right to personally reject every rule I don't like when I try playing it! :-P Double sharp (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

(P.S. In tenjiku, where these pieces probably first appeared, the answers would be no – only the hapless piece they land on is captured – and yes.) Double sharp (talk) 15:33, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Number of piece types

The "Game Equipment" section indicates 209 types. However, the table given in the "Setup" section gives only 208 types. I count myself and I find only 208. Is there an explanation? Thanks Cazaux (talk) 21:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

There are indeed 209 types:

• the table in section Game equipment has 299 lines, 92 of which correspond to pieces that only appear when another one is promoted; that makes only 207 types of piece, but as the two howling dogs and the two mountain eagles are on the same line, we should add 2 types;
• the legend in section Setup shows 41 lines of 5 items, plus 3 in the last one; that makes 208 types, again plus 2 (howling dog, mountain eagle), that is, 210; then you can notice there is a ‘wind soldier’ in the penultimate line, which does not appear anywhere else in the page (I guess it is a mistake).

UseresuUK (talk) 09:51, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand for the Game Equipment section, but I don't for the Setup section. Because I can't see any "wind soldier". I see a "wind general" on the penultimate line but that piece is well present. So, do we have 209 or 210 pieces?Cazaux (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I was confused because the Setup table has also been reduced to 207 entries (probably removing the wrong "wind soldier"). 207+2=209, everything is OK now. Thanks for the explanation. Cazaux (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

The move of the free eagle (奔鷲)

As currently written, the move of the free eagle is as follows:

• Jump/ranging: The free eagle can jump to the second or third square, and then move any number of free squares in a straight line in the four orthogonal directions or diagonally backward.
• Jump/ranging: It can jump to the second to fourth square, and then move any number of free squares in a straight line diagonally forward.
• It need not jump before moving nor move after jumping.

However, I took a look at the Japanese article and it does not seem so simple. As far as I understood it (with Google translate), the free eagle can either move as a free king or use a kind of 3-step single-direction lion move in any direction (4-step if diagonally forward). But I’m totally not sure about the details such as igui… Have someone got a clue?

UseresuUK (talk) 19:06, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Having tested the .swf, it seems that the free eagle cannot jump and then range as a free king: either it moves as a free king or it moves as a directional lion with 3 or 4 moves. For the latter, it can igui or pass a turn by moving to an adjacent cell and go back; it can also jump to any of the ‘lion’ cells in a given direction and then continue in the same direction (away from the original cell, potentially capturing each time; once no longer adjacent to the departure it cannot go back, even in the case it has 4 moves (for example, cannot igui by a 2-step jump); that might be a mistake) up to the 3rd cell (or 4th if diagonally forward), jumping over anything; however, I suspect a mistake: the .swf does not allow, for instance, to capture an enemy and then jump over a friendly piece, while it allows to jump over any friendly piece (sufficiently close) first and then capture several enemies – the problem may be that after the first jump or step, the .swf only allows steps.

UseresuUK (talk) 19:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

English-language software is frequently wrong even in the stated rules, let alone in the coding. I wouldn't put much credence in it. — kwami (talk) 12:30, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

WP-ja says [note: I'm not bothering to say each time it doesn't have to capture to move]:

• It can move any distance in any direction without jumping (= King)
• In any direction but diag. forward, it can step-capture up to three times, and can jump. That is, it can (1) move one square, (2) move one square then move one beyond that (capture--capture), (3) igui an adjacent square, (4) jump to the second square, (5) move three squares, (potentially) capturing on each one (capture--capture--capture), (6) jump and step, (7) step and jump, (8) jump to the third square, (9) step and igui (ending up on the 1st square).
• Diagonally forward, it can do the same up to four times. That is, besides the above, it can (1) move four squares, capturing on each, (2) jump the first square then capture on the next three, (3) capture on the first, jump the second, the capture on the next two (capture--jump--capture--capture), (4) capture--capture--jump--capture, (5) jump--jump--capture--capture, (6) jump--capture--jump--capture, (7) capture--jump--jump--capture, (8) capture--capture--igui, (9) jump--igui (ending up on the 2nd square), (10) double igui (that is, move out 2 squares then move back to zero), (11) jumping igui (snatch piece off the 2nd square w/o moving).

That is, it can take 3 or 4 steps, capturing or ignoring any pieces on the way. This is no different from the pieces in Chu apart from the range being longer: it's a 3- or 4-step linear lion move.

I don't know where our version came from, but WP-ja has been stable since it was created in 2004. — kwami (talk) 12:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I fully agree, but wrong as though the .swf be, I was citing it just because it looked more like the description in the Japanese article than like the English one. Thank you very much for the translation (I was writing an answer when I saw it)! It seems the software was wrong indeed.

UseresuUK (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

I verified all the big games apart from this one at WP-ja, and there were lots of discrepancies like this. Where it looked like the error was on the japanese side (such as their verbal description not matching their diagram), I left them a note, though I think i only got an answer once. I suspect that several more pieces will be wrong. — kwami (talk) 13:27, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

That's assuming WP-ja is correct, but they're not a RS. — kwami (talk) 04:51, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Mountain dove or turtle dove?

Wondering about the English name of 山鳩 . In this article it is listed as "Mountain dove" (MD), and this is the literal meaning of the two kanji. Japanese Wiktionary, however, appears to list 山鳩 as a common name for the turtle dove. See: [1]. I don't speak Japanese though, so I'm not sure if this translation holds for the shogi piece. (See also: ja:山鳩). Can someone who speaks Japanese weigh in? —Pengo 01:07, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't speak Japanese (*yet!*), but I'm going to weigh in anyway... The shogi piece would be sufficiently obscure that I don't really know if it has a standard English name, as it would be so little-mentioned. So I would just use "turtle dove", following the usual meaning of 山鳩, and which would generate a distinct mental image of the piece. (In a sense what you call a piece is secondary to its movement powers, but the name probably provides some sort of insight as to what the players or game designers were thinking.) The mountain dove doesn't appear in any smaller historical shogi variant, so unfortunately we cannot use that as a guide to naming. Double sharp (talk) 15:43, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Seconded. — kwami (talk) 19:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

The ja interwiki gives yamabato 山鳩 as an alternate name for kijibato 雉鳩 "Oriental turtle dove, Streptopelia orientalis". Keahapana (talk) 21:41, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

(Well, the shogi piece uses the Sino-Japanese reading sankyū...) Double sharp (talk) 09:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Taikyoku shogi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100724065418/http://taikyokushogi.hp.infoseek.co.jp:80/taikyoku.html to http://taikyokushogi.hp.infoseek.co.jp/taikyoku.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111111183546/http://taikyokushogi.hp.infoseek.co.jp/taikyoku.swf to http://taikyokushogi.hp.infoseek.co.jp/taikyoku.swf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

George Hodges' Ten Shogi Variants

Available online, with some interesting comments on taikyoku (p.130ff). Double sharp (talk) 15:04, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Recent changes by Fonsecafrancesco04 and 79.30.127.92

Can we please have sources for these changes? Some of them (e.g. promotion of the king) directly contradict Isao Umebayashi's published account. Double sharp (talk) 14:13, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I do an error of translation. I do the same error on the Japanese Wikipedia and I undid it. Fonsecafrancesco04 (talk) 18:40, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Recent Moves, Taikyoku shogi to Taikyoku shōgi

Hello. So this was originally posted at help desk and here. Finally moved it here, as its related to this page. After reading Marchjuly and others, the best course of action may be to move back the title of this page to Taikyoku shōgi without the macron (Taikyoku shogi).

Pinging users who maybe interested: Thylacine24 OkayKenji ^{(talk page)} 04:02, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me.--Thylacine24 (talk) 04:27, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Note As of right now, I've made a request at WP:RM/TR, to turn the page back to Taikyoku shogi on the reason it was not discussed. Most likely after that we can determine consensus. OkayKenji ^{(talk page)} 04:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

d Ï v Ï n se æ s p æ r r k o w

so the dovine sparrow has ambiguity right there is ñœ piece that has assymetric movement & ñœ mirrored counterpart Ï believe that the dovine sparrow is the mirror of the dovine turtle, who doesn't have any ambiguity. thus, Ï believe that we shuld belive the first doagrma & not the seconf Evan Tsipas (talk) 04:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)