Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Board and table games/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6→Archive 8

Comment on notability guidelines

I would like to (informally) invite comments, suggestions, changes on the proposed guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (toys and games). I thought that I would mention this here as it's particularly relevant to this WikiProject. --Craw-daddy | T | 21:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

These notability guidelines are going to get rid of a *lot* of current board game articles. — Val42 (talk) 14:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
How exactly? The majority of articles do need reliable sources, but under current notability guidelines (i.e. WP:N) they still do. I don't see how the proposed guidelines will get rid of a lot of current articles, so I'd be interested in knowing why you think this is the case. --Craw-daddy | T | 21:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Is there an update on this? WP:TOYS is marked with a big 'failed' banner, so what is the current guidelines for notability for games? (My personal opinion is that we should include more, rather than less, as long as any fact is verifiable, but I know this may be a bit too inclusive for many WP editors...) Sverre (talk) 19:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

RFC on naming conventions

We're having some kind of move war between Elasund and Elasund: The First City, and it's leading us to WT:RFC#Subtitles in naming. Some input from this project would be appreciated. kelvSYC (talk) 17:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

To make a correction, the discussion is at WT:NC#RFC: Subtitles in naming. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Tarot

Since the articles Tarot reading and Tarot card games have been merged into the Tarot article, I believe the Tarot article should also fall under the scope of the WikiProject Board and table games. There are also articles under the category "Tarot card games" which would also warrant our attentionSmiloid (talk) 04:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1243 articles are assigned to this project, of which 342, or 27.5%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. Subscribing is easy - just add a template to your project page. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Bannering articles of interest

I'm not a member of this project, but quite a few of the game pages listed under your root category (Category:Tabletop games) that I looked at in about a 10-minute period are not bannered with this project's banner ({{BTGProject}}). Someone in the project might ask a bot to banner all the pages referenced in and under that category (I believe User:SatyrBot can do this). Magicpiano (talk) 03:29, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Dugi Board Game

Hello there, is there interest in an article about the board game Dugi? It's a simple yet tactical abstract board game with an enormous potential for Generalization, moreover it's licensed CC. There's an initial article on "The Wireless" and Boing Boing (links to follow), and there are some versions to play it online. On the Super Duper Games wiki (last link) there's a discussion about making it more playable via variants. IMHO the notability stems from the CC-license of the whole idea (cf. Monopoly for the opposite) and tactical complexity out of very few rules and a simple design. -- 80.136.58.249 (talk)

Discussion of {{FreeContentMeta}}

{{FreeContentMeta}}, which is used in the {{CardsWiki}} template, is under discussion. Please see template talk:FreeContentMeta#Inline or floating to participate in this discussion. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Board and table game

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Parqués information

I would like to ask anyone about book sources for that Colombian game. There is no book about Colombian culture that says something about it. Maybe on the USA or elsewhere there is a book on board games that cites it. I would like to know the title of that book; I am very interested in adding sources and references to the Parqués article. Davichito (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Gary Gygax

I have nominated the Gary Gygax article for a GA review. If there is anything you can do to help it get passed, please join in! Also, feel free to comment on the D&D WikiProject talk page regarding our efforts to get articles in the 0.7 release. BOZ (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Great news! :) Gary Gygax is now a Good Article. I have now nominated Wizards of the Coast. BOZ (talk) 02:33, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Wizards of the Coast is now up for GA review. If you're interested in helping, come join me. :) BOZ (talk) 21:40, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
The article is now officially a GA. :) BOZ (talk) 00:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Nominated Chance and Community Chest cards for deletion

I have nominated the article for deletion. The deletion discussion can be found here CTJF83Talk 07:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Tic-tac-toe

Just come across the following

".....bent over a sheet of paper, playing endless games of double noughts and crosses against himself......."

Graham Greene "A Gun For Sale" (Penguin 1963 ISBN 0 14 00.1896 4) Pp38

Can't find any reference anywhere on-line to a game "double noughts and crosses"

Ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Broughton (talk • contribs) 14:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

D&D Miniatures Changes Announcement

adding this here since this project claims to do work on this article so that people are aware of recent events in case the project is able to contribute to the changes the article may need.

New information about this change has been added and a reference link. Someone may want to include more that works on this article to clarify any confusions the newest information may cause in the article. shadzar-talk 07:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Canceled

Latest news has the skirmish game as canceled and I have started to include details, which means the article may need substantial rewrites in order to bring it into the proper tense. shadzar-talk 07:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

500 Rum/Michigan Rummy difference

A Search for Michigan Rummy redirects to 500 Rum, when in fact, Michigan Rummy is a distinctly different game. 500 Rum is based on rummy and you get points for tricks, Michigan Rummy is a betting game with pools of chips that you get for playing particular cards. Apparently Michigan Rummy is known in some places as Boodles or Stops, so if those games exist, the redirect should go there.

Here's more information on Michigan Rummy: http://www.pressmantoy.com/instructions/instruct_michrummy.html http://www.pagat.com/stops/michigan.html

you can also see a version of the game board if you search through the pressmantoy.com list of classic games and puzzles.

Michigan Rummy is similar to Tripoley, but distinct (I think) in that Tripoley only has hearts for money cards, and combines michigan rummy with Hearts and a 3rd card game. Tripoley doesn't have a page on wikipedia yet either

http://www.tripoleyrules.com/

I'm not a normal Editor, and don't know how to do that stuff. Just wanted to pass on the info that I had to someone who can use it well.

Thanks, -megan 35.12.24.160 (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Games Workshop article update request

Hello, I stumbled upon the Games Workshop article today and noticed that some information is badly outdated, particularly the In development section. I don't know anything about the topic, so I thought I'd let the "experts" know. Thanks! momoricks (make my day) 07:12, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

If you know it's out of date, you must know something about it. More than I do at any rate. ~_^ --Rindis (talk) 16:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

The War of the Ring (board game)

This article talks mainly about a war of the ring board game. But at the end of the article It starts to talk in very little detail of another version of the game made by SPI. I would like to start a new article that talks about the SPI version of the game.--Kangaroo2 (talk) 14:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Need notability help for Star Wars - The Queen's Gambit

I deprodded Star Wars - The Queen's Gambit, it's been around for years and I didn't want to see it disappear without a fight.

I'm unfamiliar with the game and the article does not indicate notability.

If there is no notability attached soon, I or any other editor may send it to AFD. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:38, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Star Wars - The Queen's Gambit

An article of interest to this project, Star Wars - The Queen's Gambit, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star Wars - The Queen's Gambit. Thank you. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Federation and Empire strategy wargame needs references to remain

I de-prodded F&E on the grounds that a Trek board game that's been in print for over two decades is very likely to be verifiable, but The Rules do say that articles must be backed up by something better than our word. It needs reliable sources if it is to be retained.

Can you please help? Neither the prodder or I are board game hobbyists, and the subject seems too old for Dr. Google to work his magic. We're forced to rely on your aid as the people most likely to know what to look for, where to look for it, and the relevant conventions. Tips on more effective ways of bugging people than this message would also be appreciated.

The Star Trek wikiproject has been poked with a suspiciously similar message. --Kizor 11:06, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Milestone Announcements

Announcements
  • All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page.
  • Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project.
  • No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work.
Click here for more information or to sign your project up.

I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 (t, c) 21:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 04:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 08:53, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Marvel Trading Card Game

Seeing as how there's no wikiproject for CCGs and the Magic project seems inactive, I was wondering if an editor from this project could look at Marvel Trading Card Game and make sure the description of gameplay is written well enough for a card game. It's a video game, but follows the same rules as the physical version so I tried to explain the Vs System as well as I could. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 14:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

It looks reasonable to me. The Gameplay section is better-written, if a bit less precise, than much of VS System, and could stand to be merged there. Unless there are areas where the software's implementation of the game system is inaccurate or incomplete (and I don't personally recall any, though my own experience with the software is limited to a couple weeks shortly after its release and I didn't have previous familiarity with the physical cards), I'd prefer that section to be primarily referenced to sources concentrating on the game system itself rather than reviews of the software. —Korath (Talk) 02:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Unfortunately, I'm really only familiar with reliable video game sources, I'm not sure where to look for table game sources. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 06:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Ticket to Ride

There is a dispute over whether Ticket to Ride should be a disambiguation page. The discussion could use comments from more users at Talk:Ticket to Ride or Talk:Ticket to Ride (disambiguation). —Lowellian (reply) 22:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Delisted Dice as GA

Per Talk:Dice/GA1. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 15:54, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi! The Dungeons & Dragons portal is currently a featured portal candidate here. Since D&D is related to board and table games, I was wondering if the members of this project could take a look and comment on the nomination. Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 14:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Does your WikiProject care about talk pages of redirects?

Does your project care about what happens to the talk pages of articles that have been replaced with redirects? If so, please provide your input at User:Mikaey/Request for Input/ListasBot 3. Thanks, Matt (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Solitaire Board Wargames

While the original article is good, it is incomplete and in some respects, misleading;e.g.The above mentioned B-17 Queen of the skies commands a very large and enthusiastic following. I have been involved in Board Wargaming for only a couple of years, but I have researched the subject extensively in an attempt to determine which games would be best for me. The research suggests that solitaire wargaming is actually more common than playing other players. The reason for this is primarily the difficulty in finding gaming partners who have common time availability. Also, I have found it commonly stated that games not designed for solo play can offer a satisfying and fun experience when played solo. There are many mechanisms for doing this, but I prefer to just play each side as best as I can.

In recent years there have been published many games designed primarily for solitaire play. I own RAF(Battle of Britain), Silent War(U.S. WWII submarine campaign in the Pacific, Hornet Leader II(potential modern conflicts) and B-29 Superfortress(B-29 bombing campaign over Japan). Each of these games is a marvel of ingenuity in design and offer many exciting hours of enjoyment. As the games are played solo, playing times need not be coordinated with other people. Just recently, a new updated RAF has been released to a great reception. Another well received new game is D- Day: Omaha Beach. In the last 15 years there have been innumerable other Board wargames released that have been designed for solo play. Every era from Ancient Japan to Napoleon, to the many battles of WWI and WW II have been covered as well as games devoted to individual commanders such as Alexander the Great, Patton and Rommel. There are games that focus on naval warfare, air warfare and land warfare.

In my understanding the broadest division of these games is "Simulation" vs "Game". Everyone has different tastes. Some like lots of fast action shooting and destruction without regard for historical and battleground reality, while others prefer historical veracity in a simulation of a conflict with a known outcome. I could go on and on. The main point is that Solitaire Board Wargaming is alive and well. There are more games being published than a person could possible play and these games cover every possible aspect of war, historical, possible or futuristic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radsailor (talk • contribs) 03:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Backgammon GAR notification

Backgammon has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Utility of outlines to wikiprojects

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 21:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible deprecation of the "Future" templates

I have started a discussion on the possible deprecation of the "Future" templates at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Deprecating "Future" templates. Since this project uses such a template, I invite everyone from this WikiProject to participate in the discussion. --Conti|✉ 11:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Your help needed

We have an unsourced category waiting to be sourced by you on Talk:Warmachine#Unsourced_category. It is a minor task, but a major headache. Discussion on that talkpage, or just edit the article, if you have something. Debresser (talk) 21:46, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Axis & Allies Miniatures

Some work is needed on making these pages more encyclopedic. Axis & Allies Miniatures (land version) is currently at AfD, and will probably get deleted. Axis & Allies Miniatures exists, as does Axis & Allies Naval Miniatures: War at Sea. I propose merging the War at Sea article into the main one, and cutting down the excess detailed information such as the complete lists of units. The miniature game may indeed lack enough notability to be included separately from Axis & Allies, so maybe the whole lot should be stubbed and merged there? Fences&Windows 01:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a plan, Stan.  :) ArcAngel (talk) 02:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Card game infoboxes

File:08_of_spades.svg (a large graphic of the Eight of Spades) is currently being used to illustrate infoboxes for various card game articles, few (if any) of which attach any special relevance to the eight of spades card. The editor's rationale appears to be that the games are from the "eights" family, but this seems a little opaque, to the point of confusing the reader, who would expect the text to at least refer to the card.

What do other editors think? --Gnomus (talk) 16:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Casino Card Game

No one seems to know the version I play which incorporates Royal Casio rules but adds the Big Casio (10 diamonds) which is worth 10 or 16 and the Small Casio (2 spades) is worth 2 or 15.

the most spades is worth 2 points the last trick is worth 1 point the most cards is worth 1 point each sweep is 1 point each Ace is 1 point 2 spades is 1 point 10 diamonds is 2 points —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.232.99.194 (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Shogun (1986 board game)

The article says it is a stub and needs expanding. I own the game and I know it very well, having played at least 50 games over the years. The basic article does not have any errors. What kind of expansion is needed ? --ThePro (talk) 15:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games#Structure should give you some idea of the material a good article should contain. Glancing at it, it could certainly benefit from a photo, and some more explicit information about the "interesting features" of its design. --McGeddon (talk) 08:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

  1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
  2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.

There are minor issues on some game players who are based in China and have old articles there will definitely be RS but finding them could be non-trivial. Whereas there are many dubious pages that have lots of poor references.Tetron76 (talk) 22:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 02:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

  1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
  2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 02:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Userbox template

I created a template for the wikiproject user box here: Template:User WP Board and table games. EeepEeep (talk) 05:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Archive 4/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Archive 4/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.
There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.
If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 01:23, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

bgg par

I'm changing {{bgg par}} and friends to no longer act as citations. The reasons are that first of all they are mostly used in the external links. Second, they are bad citations in references. They don't include the date, author etc. Cite web is probably a better choice when you use them as a references. Or of course create a {{bgg cite}} or something. Just contact me if you find a problem, the changes can easily be undone if needed. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:28, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Bumped into this, thought this may help. (Russian Board Games).

Thanks, Marasama (talk) 15:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Game development

There's a long discussion on the talk page there to rename the article, because it covers only video games. Editors who work in that industry are opposed. Pcap ping 00:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Reassessment of Puerto Rico (board game)

I have been editing the Puerto Rico (board game) article. It has improved in quality since receiving the Start-Class on the quality scale. How do I go about requesting a reassessment? BaShildy (talk) 13:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Heroscape - cross posting from Talk:Heroscape

I know nothing about this game but have come across several articles while stub-sorting, such as Humans (Heroscape) and Werewolves (Heroscape). These articles are in strange categories such as Category:Jandar’s Army, and the category pages are a strange mix of article and category, but don't have any parent categories. In short it all seems a strange muddle and editors interested in Heroscape might like to dive in and try to sort it out. PamD (talk) 10:01, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

To avoid any duplicate discussions, I suggest that if you want to reply to this you do so at Talk:Heroscape#New_articles.2C_categories.2C_etc. Thanks. PamD (talk) 10:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Board and table game articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Board and table game articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:17, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family Feud (home game)

Hello, this is a general notice that Family Feud (home game) has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family Feud (home game). Thank you. Vodello (talk) 19:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Is there a Primary Topic for "Hearts"?

There is a discussion at Hearts#Primary topic which may be of interest to members of this project. older ≠ wiser 21:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

wiki project strategy games

there are a number of board game articles that have strategy game project tags that are of interest to board games as the strategy project is labelled inactive, I am adding a few BTGProject tags.Tetron76 (talk) 12:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

board game gameplay and terms

the Category:Board games gameplay and terms has been partly overlooked by the group. I am adding a few tags to existing pages in the category but the category needs a lot of work.Tetron76 (talk) 12:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

card games

Wow, collectively there are huge issues happening here of almost identical information on lots of whist games. Is there a way to auto add all games in a category to a project as there are a lot of tagged pages I have just been through the Category:trick-taking card gamesTetron76 (talk) 21:38, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I guess there must be somewhere, probably on the user page of some technically skilled editor. If not, someone may be able to write this tool easily. Unfortunately I don't know how to find such tools or people. Maybe look for backroom discussion of WikiProjects or Categories.
Good luck. --P64 (talk) 16:46, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

RPGQuest

Does anyone have any sources for RPGQuest? 129.33.19.254 (talk) 18:48, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that you will need to go to a portugese forum to find Rs - but as I mentioned in the AfD the wiki portuguese article attributes a quote to "dragao brasil" which would be a RS but doesn't give the issue number etc.Tetron76 (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Finding Recent Changes

Special:Recentchangeslinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games

While this page is missing several major changes it was finding several changes: My concern this change was over an enquiry I made at the vilage pump but the other link on this page breaks fairly often too.Tetron76 (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Biographies and people in categories

There is a need to build guidelines for notability criteria for what makes someone notable in the games field i.e. Wikipedia:Notability_(sports)#Curling. Especially games players that I feel needs to have a section similar to the sports and athletes. An example of a question that has just arisen is does winning the first scrabble world championship count as just WP:Oneevent combined contribution is also significant.

I'm here because I'm a member of the Roleplaying game project. I do find it useful to have guidelines to help editors make notability decisions before creating biographical articles. Thus, it may actually be appropriate for a person to be deemed notable for a single event, as stated in Biographies of Living Persons: One Event . I find most useful notability guidelines that give examples of notable people with details about the factors that tip the balance toward notability. I agree that notability for board and table game players could be modeled after sports notability guidelines. The RPG project doesn't currently have articles for players, and I don't foresee that it ever will. The biographical articles are currently inclusive of game designers, authors, publishers, and artists. The biographic notability criteria are therefore modeled after book, film, music, videogame, and art criteria rather than sports criteria. I am more inclusionist than most other editors I've come across, but I do get a bit frustrated when editors make no attempt to cite any sources other than the personal web page of the article's subject when creating articles. --Vampyrecat (talk) 19:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The other conversation is do we want to have category inclusion criteria does a certain threshold need to be met before we add someone to Category:Chess players?Tetron76 (talk) 14:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Baseball "benefits" from the dominance of the North American major leagues 1871 to 2010, both prominence for most editors and notability by WP guidelines. Every MLB player is notable, by definition for several years now, and all 17000 have pages (many stubs), for a few years now.
It may be useful to skim Category:Baseball players and successive subcategories Category:Baseball players by competition, Category:Major League Baseball players, Category:Major League Baseball players by team, Category:National Association of Professional Base Ball Players members by team.
If nothing else, this exercise may clearly show where you don't want to go. --P64 (talk) 17:01, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
This has indeed helped me think better about the category. I think what has happened is that too many categories start to exist that don't carry relevant information. Such as Poker players by nationality. There is no important distinction between a poker player from France to Germany. The person should be in two categories instead. As a result what I now think is needed is not exclusion/inclusion criteria but a category called something like Category:Casual games players. This way someone can be included in say the chess category without the expectation that they are very good at the game.Tetron76 (talk) 17:04, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Somewhere last fortnight I provided comment regarding both important casual players, I think you would say (Dwight Eisenhower, golf or bridge) and fictional players (Charlie Brown, baseball; Frank Merriwell, many sports). I don't recall the issue or location more precisely.
FWIW, Eisenhower is in a golfer category, not in a bridge player category. Brown is in a ballplayer category. Merriwell is in few or no sports person categories. --P64 (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Jacks and knucklebones suggested merge

These articles have been tagged for suggested merger for some time, and frankly it appears to me to be a good idea for a merger, as there appears to be no actual distinction between the games. At most, jacks is one set of rules. Just wanted to jumpstart discussion on this, as it has been sitting there for awhile. oknazevad (talk) 02:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Although, it may seem odd the knucklebones page definitely should stay due to historical importance. I would have little issue with merging Jacks into the knucklebones article. If you look at the other language wikipedia knucklebones is present using differing sources. The Jacks page would still need a redirect probably to a subsection of knucklebones. It should be noted that Jacks has significant notability and is in the dictionary. Tetron76 (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Signpost article on WP Board and table games

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject Board and table games for a Signpost article to be published in May. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Other editors will also have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 19:28, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Today is the last opportunity to participate in the Signpost interview. We already have one respondent, but more are welcome. -Mabeenot (talk) 14:45, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Style question

I have a question about style that I didn't see dicussed on the main project page. Are game names to be italicized or not? The usage seems inconsistent. For example, Monopoly is italicized, but Mystery Date is not. FWIW, all video game titles are always italicized. Thanks in advance! — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 15:29, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

It seems to me that they should be.oknazevad (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
I would have taken the other position that the italics should only be needed for emphasis. Video games like books have titles, board games have names. So in academic papers you would not expect to see chess but chess. Many games are also words in the dictionary. There are a very small number of games such as The game of life which would be ambiguous whether to add italics and if the text would be put in quotes such as to avoid ambiguity "the designer of Rome".Tetron76 (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
There's a difference between a generic game like chess, checkers or poker, and a game like the aformemtioned Monopoly, Mistery Date or Trivial Pursuit; the latter are titles of creative works, even if there's multiple editions. oknazevad (talk) 16:37, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
It is true that there are three distinct categories of games as regards naming conventionm but scientific works still don't Italicise or emphasis for games such as Abalone, Twixt and Monopoly. The small number of games where it is complicated is when the game is published as a book. The game of life needs italics as you don't say, "He designed the game the game of life" without the use of emphasis.
I like oknazevad's opinion on this. Generic volumes of books, such as The Bible are not ital'ed, while specific books are, such as The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 16:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

A related problem is whether to capitalise game names or not. The general guidance is not to capitalise, and for chess, poker, whist etc. that's fine. But for articles that discuss numerous games, including some very obscure ones, that doesn't make sense. Somewhere on the way from poker via belote/Belote, skat/Skat and doppelkopf/Doppelkopf to Smear, the capitalisation must start. As there seems to be no natural demarcation line and game anthologies typically capitalise all games, I think we should do the same in game articles. I also find it hard to come up with a general scheme for dealing with playing card terms such as ace/Ace, king/King, queen/Queen etc. Normally, ace is lowercase. But how about the Jack? Writing jack would be absurd, and it would be strange to write "ace, king, queen, Jack, ten". Or is it 10? For the moment I am not worrying about these things and just building content, but sooner or later we will need a style guideline for games. Hans Adler 17:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Primarily this discussion concerns intellectual property, I think. I suppose that The game of life concerns an exceptional lowercase trademark, so it needs italics or quotation marks for distinction even if the general rule is to rely on ordinary English capitalization of proper nouns.
Adler's main point is well taken, although I'm not sure whether Smear is unusual because it is an ordinary verb, noun, and adjective in English. Regarding the possible pre-history of contract bridge, it's usual to name the Russian game biritch in italics, but I interpret that as the usual (ordinary English) judgment about whether a foreign word has been naturalized or remains foreign. (Re English words, I haven't read about wikipedia style covering old forms: obsolete, archaic, Middle E, Old E.)
Wikipedia: WikiProject Contract bridge includes styles for naming the 52 cards, 4 suits, and 13 ranks in a standard deck. (That style guide is likely to be revised soon, however, based on a recent study of style guides developed elsewhere.) --P64 (talk) 19:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't know about that style guide. If the Bridge project can live with lowercase "jack", then I have no problem with it either.
Here are some examples that may be better than Smear:
  • Hearts. If we don't capitalise this, we have to say something like "game of hearts" all the time to prevent confusion. And it just looks wrong without capitalisation.
  • Stops. This has similar problems.
  • German Whist. Here we have the same problem that WikiProject Birds has: German Whist is an English game rather than a German variant of whist. Should we write it "German whist" anyway? Or maybe even "german whist" because "German" here doesn't mean German but is just part of the name?
  • Boston. Not the city but the game that was the rage all over continental Europe for a long time. Should we really write it as "boston"?
  • Crazy Eights. This is not a crazy variant of the game Eights. (I believe there are several games called Eights, all unrelated to Crazy Eights.) And the eights in the game aren't actually crazy, either. They are just wildcards.
  • La belle, le flux et le trente-un. This is, of course, where it gets really weird. There are several common French card games with such weird titles. Equally weird, but in a different way, is Commère, accommodez-moi.
My take on this: Games have titles or proper names, so they should be capitalised. They may not have authors, but that's also true for many myths. As we can see in Category:Flood myths for example, Wikipedia writes the names/titles of myths in uppercase. (The lowercase titles are descriptive titles.)
All the English game anthologies that I have seen (several dozen) do it the same way. Therefore I think we should have a naming guideline similar to WP:WikiProject Birds#Bird names and article titles. I tried it with lowercase, but in articles that mention many games it just gets weird. Hans Adler 22:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
If the game or term is a word in the dictionary then there is a choice to make it lower case, but the game Twixt is more correctly TwixT and abalone to name but one is all lower case on the box. I think that it is less ambiguous to use capitals and is the style in most papers that I have seen (but not all). A German version of whist will have a different name in English but there is a Category:Chinese chess players which is clearly ambiguous.Tetron76 (talk) 11:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
That category name is ambiguous but I see no problem except that use of the category should be monitored, which the watchlist cannot enable. Our treatment paves the way for Chinese Xiangqi players when their time comes. Of course Chinese chess-players and Chinese-chess players may occasionally be a problem in prose.
I have revised the one category's preface by adding a link to Category: Xiangqi players. FWIW the old version wrote the name of the alternative game in the first of these four ways: Xiangqi Xiangqi xiangqi xiangqi. --P64 (talk) 20:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
It would be nice to have consistency in the naming due to the links being case sensitive and apparently differing opinion on the capitalisation rules being adopted at different times. International prize list of Diplomacy, List of World Backgammon champions, World Chess Championships, List of chess openings List of world championships. Tetron76 (talk) 12:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
If it is important to handle these families of links with minimum use of redirects (which I doubt) and a general rule, then capitalization is the only way to go. So many article titles must capitalize names of games, and perhaps also words such as Champion(s) or Championship(s), because they include multiword trademarks. For example, North American Bridge Championships. Compare Olympic Games.
World Chess Champion(ship) may be an example. The article Development of the World Chess Championship begins with lowercase world chess championship and world champion. At least its first use of capitals seems gratuitous: "... the title "Champion of FIDE" quietly vanished after Alekhine won the 1929 world championship match that he and Bogoljubow themselves arranged.[39] While negotiating his 1937 World Championship re-match with Alekhine, Euwe proposed ..."
List of World Backgammon champions does not indicate any grounds for its title instead of world backgammon champions or world champions at backgammon. Contrast the title List of world championships in mind sports but see the chaos in its first paragraph and consistent capitalization in its section headings! The main article Backgammon does cover a World Series of Backgammon, first 2006.
World Champion(ship). Evidently we have inconsistent style regarding World, Champion(ship), and their combinations, as well as names of games and families of games.--P64 (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
This is true and I am responsible for the List of world championships in mind sports inconsistancy and I will fix it after this debate. I was aiming to have a similar style to the List of world championships page that was excluding games. The problem I have is that I would write World Champion in a sentence but then
  • WP:CAPS states that only proper nouns should be capitalised after the first word.
  • WP:MOS however states capital letters in article titles are used as they would be in a normal sentence.
The problem is that these two statements are not identical! The issue with a game under WP:CAPS would be lower case unless the first word and WP:MOS allows for a capital letter. The mind sports bit I can fix by putting to lower case throughout, at the time though there were about 8 different redirects to Game of skill but I have since recreated an article for Mind sport.Tetron76 (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
The list articles should stag with lowercase; in these cases "world championships" is a common noun, as it doesn't refer to one particular championship the name of which includes the term "World Championship", but a generic term.
Articles on an individual championship may be a proper noun (if it's treated as such in most sources). The difficulty is the use of the term "World Championship" or just "Championship" as a short form of the proper noun. Just as referring to someone by last name alone doesn't render their name into an uncapitalized common noun, using a short form of a title doesn't make it a common noun. But, since the short form is the same words as a common noun, it can be difficult to tell if it's referring to the proper name or not. oknazevad (talk) 09:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
This has probably resolved the issues of capitalising world champion. If I understand the usage correctly we are saying that if it is used to identify a specific world championships then it is capitalised but if it is being used in the general case (ie with an indefinite article or as a collective plural) it is lower case.
  • She was the first World Champion at both chess and bridge. (specific)
  • He is a world champion at chess. (general usage because of a)
  • Below is a list of World Backgammon Champions. (specific event)
  • There are world championships in most games. (general plural)
Are we then using the same rules as Encarta dictionary uses, that trademarked games are capitalised and other games are lower case. so the History of Monopoly (game) rather than History of monopoly (game). Whereas List of backgammon openings rather than List of Backgammon openings. But should be List of World Backgammon Champions. The other question is Fox and geese and Dots and Boxes should the latter be Dots and boxes?Tetron76 (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree that specificity alone makes a proper noun. She may have been the first world champion at both chess and bridge.

I do agree with the point as Tetron elaborates below.--P64 (talk) 15:55, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Trademark or some comparable official usage makes a proper noun. Is there a backgammon organization which now crowns a World Backgammon Champion? We do have legitimate anachronisms. If there is now officially a World Backgammon Champion, use the term for anyone in a sequence of world champions at backgammon for which the title later became official. Compare Major League Baseball. Such anachronisms may be approved because economy seems to demand them and it seems futile to eschew them.

User:Oknazevad is correct about one difficulty, "use of the term World Championship or just Championship as a short form of the proper noun." The same goes for World Champion in some cases. Compare baseball's Series short for World Series in prose. Regarding poker one may say Series or World Series short for World Series of Poker. Another family of short forms is World Champion for Open World Champion, or Junior WC, or Men WC, or Women WC. --P64 (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

By specific I meant that the usage was intended to refer to a specific event that was called the Foo World Championships or the champion of said event. So the suggested usage one was to replace: "She was the first person to be both Bridge Pairs World Champion and Chess World Champion."
The backgammon (which I was treating as if it was a proper event for this conversation) to my knowledge has an event that is called the World Championships [3] but that the official bodies are largely disorganised. There has also been an attempt to have a World Series of Backgammon, The World Backgammon Association is perhaps the largest body but certainly doesn't appear to be endorsed by all countries.
The current list definitely appears to have been synthesis as I have a copy of The Backgammon Book by Oswald Jacoby and John Crawford published 1970 and the Las Vegas event wasn't described as a World Championships at this time and indeed the the most significant tournament was still in the Bahamas where the first ever international tournament was held in 1964. There are real questions about whether Paul Magriel was ever officially backgammon world champion[4], although it is widely re-reported as such from his book cover.Tetron76 (talk) 10:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

BTG Reliable sources and Awards

I was thinking that it might be useful to have a project page where we can bring together various resources to help identify common sources and what we consider to be major board game awards. Having recently been through many pages that fall under our scope, there are many areas that are in quite a bad state. I suggest five areas that would be useful to discuss and compile resources for places to look and link to are: Awards (Category:Game awards), Card games, Dice Games, Drinking games and Age of games (especially Mancala.)Tetron76 (talk) 16:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Significant Awards?

http://www.spiel-des-jahres.com/cms/front_content.php?idcat=141
http://www.festivaldesjeux-cannes.com/5.aspx?sr=50
http://boardgames.about.com/od/awards/a/mensa_select.htm (don't like this link much)
http://www.deutscherspielepreis.de/p060.php4
  • ?Premio Archemidie (Board game designer award)
http://www.studiogiochi.com/en/p/Premio-Archimede_Edizione-2010.html

Dice games

This is the most difficult are to source on wikipedia as dice games can have been around for 100s of years, yet, almost unmentioned on the web. I found the following links helpful:

Help! Pick a name

I have been trying to source a dice game described in Mia (game) and I have now found several links. But I now have no idea what the game should be called, I was hoping that someone might have played the game and have a name for it. Wikipedia currently has three articles under this game:

There looks to have been two other articles in the past maybe for this game:

  • Kuriki
  • Mexican

Other possible names include (Maya, Maxchen , twenty one (not blackjack dice!), meier, deception) I am going to start a more detailed chat on Talk:Mia (game) and would appreciate any input you can give.Tetron76 (talk) 12:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Miniatures wargaming article issues

I've posted a few issues on that discussion page. IMO the form of the article may rate a 'B' class, but the content may not qualify for 'C'. Dmforcier (talk) 01:03, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

New Category: Role Playing Games?

Many games, [such as Dungeons and Dragons and the Doom board game] seem to be more appropriately labeled as role playing games, rather then war games. The creation of a new stub labeling category, role playing would be advisable. Should it be done?

Reference Library

Although WP:BTG doesn't seem to have it's own Reference Library (as do WP:VG (here) and WP:ANIME (here)), there are magazine collections listed in other WikiProjects' Reference Libraries that cover board and tabletop games in detail and that review them. One example is the Games magazine library. Many of the magazine issues listed there could potentially help this project to establish notability and to provide references for its articles. I just wanted to raise awareness of this potential resource. Cheers. -Thibbs (talk) 17:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Just a quick heads-up: I've updated it again effectively doubling the number of board/tabletop game reviews. I also added my name as a contact in case anyone needs information from these print articles to help source Wikipedia articles. Cheers, -Thibbs (talk) 16:39, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Duplicate Categories

I noticed that there were two categories for fishing card games: Category:Fishing card games and Category:Fishing games. I've moved all the games from the smaller to the larger cat and copied the description over but now I'm not sure what to do about the empty cat, I guess it should be deleted but I'm not sure how.

Also, what are the guidelines about cats and subcats? I've noticed that some trick-taking games are in both the 'trick-taking games' cat and one of its subcategories, 'solo card games' for example, while others are only in the subcat. I think it's better to put them in both, for the sake of clarity, but I'm still new here so I don't how it usually works. - AlbionBT (talk) 11:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

No, articles should only go in the most specific category. Categories are arranged hierarchically, and should be as specific as possible. Putting an article in both a subcat and its parent defeats that purpose. See WP:CAT for more details. oknazevad (talk) 16:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


Article on Klabberjass

I am not actually in your WikiProject, but I hope you do not mind if I ask make a request. Can some one please correct the opening of the article on the card game Klabberjass? The opening of this game makes out this game is only played in Indiana, but it is, in fact, played in countries outside the United States. Many thanks if you could look into this, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I have seen that there is an article on Klabber, or Clabber, but a different article on Klaberjass - it is my fault for spelling it with two bs! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 14:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Aggravation Name

This is a story that I grew up with in Orlando, FL. I do not have any actual proof and only repeating the words from the supposed creator of the game. Unfortunately, so much time has passed I do not remember the man's name, but I want to say his first name was George and he owned a record shop in Orlando; a record shop I visited when I was older. This man was maybe 50 to 60 at the time. I was born in 1951 and I remember playing this game on a home made board under the name Wahoo. This was in the mid to late 50's. Supposedly, the maker of the game took the idea to Hasbro in the late 50's to early 60's and they patented the game under Aggravation. He was quite unhappy and told the story that Hasbro stole his game. I was playing the game even before Hasbro created their version. FL1951 (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Shadow Hunters

I have edited the Shadow Hunters page in an attempt to make it more informative. If anyone has any suggestions or ideas on how to further improve the article, feel free to let me know or to make your own contributions. -Most Serene Wikipedian (talk) 23:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Reliable source guidelines - reviews?

WP:RELY doesn't have much to say on the subject of a review as a source. Due to the nature of this WikiProject and the lack of mainstream journalistic coverage for designer games (or much in the way of dedicated journalism the way video games have), it seems that for a lot of the smaller games under our purview with notability tags, the choice is between "use reviews, often self-published ones as sources" and "put them up for deletion as being non-notable due to a lack of reliable sources." Is there an established policy on this? dkonstantinos (talk) 14:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

There isn't one for games, apparently. So we should list review sources which *should* be considered reliable, like BGG or Games magazine and put them in the project, along with awards which would indicate notability, like Spiel Des Jahres. In fact, I've started the page here. Please discuss, expand, etc.  The Steve  08:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
I had started to make list further up the talk page. But there are clearly issues to resolve before declaring a source reliable for establishing notability as opposed for being a good factual source of information.Tetron76 (talk) 16:39, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I've added several awards and links to the page from the above discussions. The problem with RS is much more complicated for this project than most because several card and dice games exist as an oral tradition still. I was adding to the list websites that might suggest notability rather than proove it. For example the Origins awards include massively shared awards and this comes up a lot in AfDs of RPG games.Tetron76 (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Starship Troopers board game

Years ago I saw a board game based on Robert Heinlein's 'Starship Troopers'. I can't remember the manf name but it was not the hex game by Avalon Hill. It was a turn based game. You spun a wheel and advanced or retreated around the board. I've looked for this game all over but can't find any reference to it. I sure would love to indentify it.

50.46.130.41 (talk) 07:34, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You can try searching or asking at the BoardGameGeek website. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 17:25, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

World Mind Sports Games

Another editor, having achieved consensus of two in discussion with me, has created 2008 World Mind Sports Games by split from World Mind Sports Games, which is now general, and main article for the (temporarily messy) category Category:World Mind Sports Games. 2012 World Mind Sports Games and 2016 World Mind Sports Games may now be WP:RED but will be created eventually, as will their eponymous categories.

"1st W.M.S.G." now redirects to "2008 W.M.S.G.". The four articles on constituent sports (xiangqi has none, maybe a 2008 demonstration sport?) remain titled Bridge at the 1st World Mind Sports Games, and so on, but they will eventually be moved from "1st" to "2008".

Categorization of the split articles is a mess, initially one messy Categories list replicated. Among other things (discuss) there are red categories for Draughts competitions and Xiangqi competitions. Because those are the two without dedicated wikiprojects I guess the scheme may originate here. --P64 (talk) 22:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I think the 2016 may turn out to be a complicated issue since the MSO prague just appears to have achieved the IFP funding. But as soon as the full medal table went up it was clear that a subpage was needed. Was a decision made as to what information should be on the main page and what on the new page?Tetron76 (talk) 16:45, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Queen of Clubs / Queen of clubs / queen of clubs ?

Any views on capitalisation of playing cards? If so, please contribute at Talk:Playing_card#Queen_of_Clubs_.2F_Queen_of_clubs_.2F_queen_of_clubs_.3F. Thanks. PamD 20:43, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

kilo de merde

Really need someone to translate the french card game [Kilo de Merde] for English Wikipedia.

WikiProject Pokedex

FYI, someone has proposed to create a Pokemon Index project, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Pokédex ; As Pokemon is a collectible card game, I thought I'd let you know. -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 07:13, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

[[abstract strategy game]] or [[Abstract strategy game|strategy game]]

Hi, would like to get some input on a Q that's been bugging me for awhile ...

Lots of game articles start something like this:

Game_name is a two-player abstract strategy game ... invented by So-and-So / originally from Africa / played on a 10×10 board / or etc.

Well, I've been sometimes changing that typical lead sentence to:

Game_name is a two-player strategy game ... invented by So-and-So / etc.

(removing the word "abstract", but retaining the same article link WP:Abstract strategy game.)

Of course I know and use the phrase "abstract strategy game" all the time when speaking or discussing about games. (So why have I sometimes removing word "abstract" from the lead? My logic has been, that articles should be geared for "the average reader", and the phrase "abstract strategy game", though familiar amongst gamers, might be somewhat off-putting to average readers by being to them a bit "geeky-sounding". And my thinking was that "strategy game" is probably an okay shorthand for the longer phrase, and because the linked article hasn't changed, is still WP:Abstract strategy game.)

But now I'm wondering if it's good changing to the shorter phrase. (Because there are other strategy games that don't fit the "abstract" category of course (Abstract strategy game being subset of Strategy game), and without word "abstract" in the lead, it might be initially confusing or misleading to the reader just what kind of strategy game the article describes. [They can always click on the link of course and go to WP:Abstract strategy game, then they know, but they might not do that, and then the shorthand phrase text might be initially confusing or misleading.)

Would like to know how others feel about it. Thanks! Ihardlythinkso (talk) 16:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I guess I'm proposing the idea, that however is decided the best way to present (the above), the "major hitter" abstract strategy games, should all be consistent. So, at the moment at least, I've made sure the following games are all consistent in their leads regarding the above: Chess, Shogi, Xiangqi, Reversi, Draughts, International draughts. (Not Go though, since its lead is currently different by discussing its strategy element in a separate sentence.) Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 15:07, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Parchis blockade rules ambiguity

Could we please explicitly clarify the game of Parchis blockade rules in regard to the below two questions? Or at minimum acknowledge that there is no universal agreement regarding the below questions?

Can two pawns belonging to different players share the same safe square? I would think not but can find no reference either way. Does a blockade on a nest release square prevent pawns from exiting that nest? I would think so but again can find no reference either way.

Thank you! DFYinVA (talk) 18:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Addition of AKA= parm to Template:Infobox game

I've added parm AKA= to template {{Infobox game}}, so game name synonyms (if any) can be listed in the article Infobox. (Similar to how it's done for template {{Infobox chess opening}} to list chess opening name synonyms, an example is here. An example using the new parm is here.) Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 10:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Lynn Willis

Apparently game designer Lynn Willis passed away today. This article could use a ton of cleanup, and much better sourcing. BOZ (talk) 00:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Battleship-like game (Airplanes / Avioane)

There is a game similar to battleship very popular in Romania. The game is worth a page and I would like to create it and add it to this effort but I am new to wikipedia and not sure if I am allowed to create that page. The game is called "Avioane" in Romanian and can be played multiplayer online here http://airplanes.ro

You have 3 identical planes that you place, just like battleship. The goal of the game, unlike battleship, is to find ONLY the 3 heads of the plane, so the first player to find them wins. The game has a lot more strategy than battleship as you can put the planes together to confuse your opponent.

Should I create it under "Avioane" or under "Airplanes" ? Ggofthejungle (talk) 21:15, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Allan B. Calhamer

Allan B. Calhamer, inventor of Diplomacy, has died earlier this week. His article could use a lot of work. 24.12.74.21 (talk) 18:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Use of gender-neutral terms

Hi all, I was just wondering if a consensus had been established as to whether to use "her" or "his" or "his or her" when referring to players in board game articles? This was discussed briefly at Talk:Chess. Thanks, The Giant Purple Platypus (talk) 23:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

"Their" is the Wikipedia accepted gender-neutral term. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 00:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Is that really true? I was under the impression that there was no universally accepted gender-neutral pronoun at Wikipedia. Personally I find "their" and "they" to be grammatically brutal. The confusion of plural and singular makes for extremely awkward reading. The far better solution in my view is to rework the sentence to avoid it. I'd recommend referring to "the player" or "players" to solve this problem. For example, rather than saying "The player must move his or her token around the board" instead say "Players must move their tokens around the board". It's very rare to find a situation where rewording like this doesn't solve the problem better than using a plural pronoun to refer to an individual. -Thibbs (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
First, I don't agree with the assumption or point of view that there is "a problem" needing "solution". Second, I think there are more instances than you do (more frequency), where the natural and good prose consistent w/ games literature uses "he" or "his", and that rewriting in attempt to get around that produces awkward results. (We could start listing concrete examples here, but that is probably inappropriate for this thread.) I just don't think generalities work, when the devil is in the details (real examples). Ihardlythinkso (talk) 16:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
I challenge any member of Project Board and table games, who presumably have their own personal library of games books, to pull off any book from their shelf and evaluate whether or not the prose is "gender neutral". (I bet it isn't. And further, to put that kind of constraint on the author of said book, would be weird and uncomfortable for the author, and if it were forced to be done by the publisher, you'd end up with a weird book aimed at satisfying a modern gender-neutral mores which isn't particularly helpful to the gamer owing the book about a game he loves, and often gets in the way of easily understandable prose.) My POV here is that this whole issue is solution looking for a problem. (There is no problem. Use of "he" and "his" is frequently in all the games literature in natural and best prose, and to somehow have a problem with that represents IMO some sort of extremist implementation of a MOS sentence not written with the games literature in mind, but fitting a social agenda instead. The real "solution" here is to update MOS re gender-neutral, so there is some congnizance there regarding games literature in particular, instead of using the current incomplete MOS to try and effect a social change inconsistent with the reality and fact of the games literatures.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 16:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Ihardlythinkso, I noticed the use of 'he' in the Chess article because I happened to be reading it after clicking multiple wikilinks (as you do) and I don't actually own any 'games literature'--perhaps that's why I found the use of 'he' rather than a more gender neutral term a bit outdated. I guess the main question is whether or not board and table games are written for the general audience or for people who have a large amount of prior knowledge of the game(s).The Giant Purple Platypus (talk) 04:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, I have a beginner's Checkers book (Starting Out in Checkers, Everyman Publishers, 2001), and it uses "he", and one can't very well call that literature for "advanced players", because it's not. But I have thought about this some more and please allow me to express a modified view ... I do think it is possible to write good prose, and have it completely gender-neutral. I was wrong by implying every games book on one's bookshelf will employ "he". I have beginner's Go book by a British 6 Dan player (The Game of Go, Carlton Books Limited, 1998), and I swear they user "Black", "White", and "the opponent" in all cases and there's not a single "he" in the book. (But you know what? It was started out with that plan. And there was money to fund that writing objective, and the result is natural text, not weird text ... they did a good job to be honest. So it is possible. But I'm sure it was hard work too, to make that prose as good as it is, natural.)

What I'm actually against, is going into a Wiki article with instances of "he", and putting "he or she" or altering the sentence construction in a desperate attempt to rid the sentence of gender-specific. If that is done the result will be gender-neutral, but the prose will be crap. And cumbersome to read for beginner or expert games-player alike. And maybe even confusing and convoluted. The deal is, we don't have gobs of money to throw at writing great natural prose free of gender-specific references like Carlton Books had when they took on project and expense of planning their book. So my modified view is that I'm not against gender-neutral and know it's entirely possible to plan an article and have it neutral. But that takes work. To go into individual sentences and excavate the "he" any which way the editor can, leaves a worse result than if the "he" were simply left alone. The Carlton Book has no artificial "he and she" for God's sake ... that has to be the worst possible solution for Wiki articles, but many editors throw that "fix" in thinking they've accomplished something when it really only damages the prose readability. (Again, the Carlton Book example uses only "Black", "White", and "the opponent" -- no "he and she", I'm sure they never even considered that, tossing that possiblity out as ridiculous early on in their planning. And they didn't resort to "their"/"they" either. Carlton's professional result took work, professional editors/writers, and probably gobs of money. A case of getting what you pay for. I guess I'm suggesting to pull back on the aim of gender neutral, "unless it can be done with clarity and precision" -- just like the MOS says. And modifying sentences with single objective to gender-neutralize them is only a half-vision when clarity [natural/readable prose, which isn't as easy to produce as one might first think] is the victim.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC) p.s. Please don't think I have a self-view of possessing writing ability to be able to make gender-neutral to the level of professionalism that the Carlton book did. Because I don't. I can only admire what they did, not imitate it. (I'm an amateur. Those guys are professionals. They make it look easy. It's not!) Cheers, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Here's an example of how bad it can get ... I just changed in a relatively important chess article "player B has a pawn on its fifth rank", to "player B has a pawn on his fifth rank". ("Its"? There was no context at all in the article section for reference to computers. The context was definitely human players. So an editor putting "its" there, either excavating "his" or avoiding it for sake of gender-neutral, was successful, but at what cost?) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 19:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Here's a real-article example, I just ran across this sentence in the first major section of article Sicilian Defence:

The pawn trade also opens the c-file for Black, who can place a rook or queen on that file to aid his queenside counterplay.

So I'd ask two questions here: 1) *Why* did the editor who supplied "he", supply it? (My guess at answer is, it was the most natural to do so, and it never bothered him or her to do otherwise.) 2) If the sentence would be made gender-neutral, *how* would [anyone] do it (well)? (For me, I don't know how. Because I'm not a professional writer. [Give me a year and I'll read the Carlton book 16 times, and by then I'd probably pick up the professional know-how. But then I'd probably like to be a paid editor at that point!]) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
It's all here, folks: Wikipedia:Gender. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 01:57, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
How helpful is it though? These contentions have been popping up ongoing, in spite of the MOS, and where all participants are already familiar. If you mean the MOS is so clear there are no issues, OK, then please let know what you would do as editor (if anything) to the sample sentence above (article Sicilian Defence). (I.e., would you leave it be? Or try to make it gender-neutral? [And if the latter, how specifically?]) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
And ditto for this sentence (occuring in article Grünfeld Defence):

White can develop his pieces in a number of ways in the Exchange Variation.

(And there are many more examples like the two above, that are out there.) Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Ditto another I just ran across (from article L game):

The game is won by leaving the opponent unable to move his L piece to a new position.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 03:33, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Here's another I just found, a phrase from sentence in article Lopez Opening:

Black can respond vigorously with 2...d5! to eliminate transpositional possibilities and solve all of his opening problems

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Here's another example I just ran across at article Chess#Check:

It is illegal for a player to make a move that would put or leave his own king in check.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 20:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Another example, from article King's Indian Defence:

The King's Indian is a hypermodern opening, where Black deliberately allows White control of the centre with his pawns, with the view to subsequently challenging it with the moves ...e5 or ...c5.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Another, from Four Knights Game, Halloween Gambit:

After 4...Nxe5, White usually plays 5.d4 (5.f4 does nothing for his development), after which Black can retreat the attacked knight to either g6 or c6.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:20, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
This example too, debated at article Talk as well as at WT:CHESS, from article Antichess:

A player wins by losing all his pieces, or being stalemated.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
From article Tiddlywinks:

As in pool or snooker, if a player pots a wink of his own colour, then he is entitled to an extra shot, and this enables a skilled player to pot all of his winks in one turn.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:39, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
From article Softball:

If the runner remains on the base until the ball is touched, or returns to the base after the catch but before the defense can put him out, he is said to tag up and may attempt to advance to the next base at his own risk.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 04:56, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
From the lede to Sicilian Defence, Smith–Morra Gambit:

The plan for White is straightforward and consists of placing his bishop on c4 to attack the f7-square, and controlling both the c- and d-files with rooks, taking advantage of the fact that Black can hardly find a suitable place to post his queen.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 21:55, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
From the lede to Rook and pawn versus rook endgame:

If the pawn is about to promote, the defending side may give up his rook for the pawn, resulting in an easily won endgame for the superior side (a basic checkmate). In a few cases, the superior side gives up his rook in order to promote the pawn, resulting in a won queen versus rook position (see Pawnless chess endgame#Queen versus rook).

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
The lede sentence to Queen and pawn versus queen endgame:

The queen and pawn versus queen endgame is a chess endgame in which both sides have a queen and one side has a pawn, which he is trying to promote.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 14:05, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
The queen and pawn versus queen endgame is a chess endgame in which both sides have a queen and one side has a pawn, which they are trying to promote. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 03:17, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
That is very confusing and here's why: Two players are referred to in the sentence, and the word "they", which is generally understood as plural, mistakenly could convey *both* players are cooperating to promote the pawn. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 03:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
From the lede to Queen's Gambit Declined, Rubinstein Trap:

Black loses a pawn after Nxd5 due to the threat of his queen being trapped on the back rank by White's Bc7.

Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:30, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

AfD: Safari cards

The trading cards article is listed as being within the scope of WikiProject Board and Table Games. Members are therefore invited to participate in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Safari cards, an AfD for one such series of trading cards. —Psychonaut (talk) 08:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games/Archive_4&oldid=1148693036"