Template:Did you know nominations/Legends (play-by-mail game)
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Legends (play-by-mail game)
- ... that an early version of the turn-based game Legends could take three to ten years to complete? Source: Dyche, David W. (July–August 1990). "Legends: A Review Part II". Paper Mayhem. No. 43. p. 40.
- ALT1: ... that a 1990 version of the turn-based game Legends could take up to ten years to complete? Source: Dyche, David W. (July–August 1990). "Legends: A Review Part II". Paper Mayhem. No. 43. p. 40.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Pitgaveny
- Comment:
5x expanded by Airborne84 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:26, 5 October 2022 (UTC).
- Since 1 October, the article has expanded from around 6,500 to over 40,000 bytes. QPQ is still pending and will need to be completed. Hook is interesting and cited. Quickly skimming the article, it appears that the game in its current form still takes a few years to play, is that right? If so, it may even be a better hook. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 21:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review Krisgabwoosh. I will do the QPQ within the next few days. It does apparently take a few years to play currently. I proposed the above hooks since a game that appeared in DYK in January 2022—Victory! The Battle for Europe—used a hook saying it took three years to complete. It seemed like the 3–10 year estimate was even longer and is one of the longest I have seen for a turn-based/play-by-mail game. I don't object to changing to the current time estimate—just wanted to note this previous entry. Airborne84 (talk) 00:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting, in that case I'd say go with the original hook to distinguish further. With that, I'd be happy to pass this once QPQ is done. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 00:17, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- QPQ completed Krisgabwoosh. For your awareness, I have edited the article since you reviewed—primarily copyediting. Appreciate the review. Airborne84 (talk) 13:09, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Perfect! Krisgabwoosh (talk) 00:20, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- QPQ completed Krisgabwoosh. For your awareness, I have edited the article since you reviewed—primarily copyediting. Appreciate the review. Airborne84 (talk) 13:09, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
- Interesting, in that case I'd say go with the original hook to distinguish further. With that, I'd be happy to pass this once QPQ is done. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 00:17, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review Krisgabwoosh. I will do the QPQ within the next few days. It does apparently take a few years to play currently. I proposed the above hooks since a game that appeared in DYK in January 2022—Victory! The Battle for Europe—used a hook saying it took three years to complete. It seemed like the 3–10 year estimate was even longer and is one of the longest I have seen for a turn-based/play-by-mail game. I don't object to changing to the current time estimate—just wanted to note this previous entry. Airborne84 (talk) 00:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
