Talk:Go, the rules of: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Hayford Peirce
m (Talk:Go rules moved to Talk:Go, the rules of: I've been thinking about this a lot and "Go rules" sounds too much to me like "Madonna rules" or "Moscow rules" or whatever, in which the meaning is both semi-jargon and equivicle in meaning. The new title should, I think, clearly tell us that it is about this game)
imported>Peter Schmitt
(this page mixes several purposes)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{checklist
{{subpages}}
|                abc = Go Rules
 
|                cat1 = Games
|                cat2 =
|                cat3 =
|          cat_check =
|              status = 2
|        underlinked =
|            cleanup =
|                  by = [[User:Christian Kleineidam|Christian Kleineidam]] 04:24, 3 February 2008 (CST)
}}
Should this be a subpage of [[Go]]? --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 20:31, 1 February 2008 (CST)
Should this be a subpage of [[Go]]? --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 20:31, 1 February 2008 (CST)
:A few people thought that the mathy description wasn't appropriate for the main Go article. In addition I think the article is long enough (and it will grow when I have time to fill out the points that don't have text at the moment) to warrant it's own article. Someone who just wants to see what Go is about doesn't need to understand the nuances of the different rule sets. [[User:Christian Kleineidam|Christian Kleineidam]] 03:50, 3 February 2008 (CST)
:A few people thought that the mathy description wasn't appropriate for the main Go article. In addition I think the article is long enough (and it will grow when I have time to fill out the points that don't have text at the moment) to warrant it's own article. Someone who just wants to see what Go is about doesn't need to understand the nuances of the different rule sets. [[User:Christian Kleineidam|Christian Kleineidam]] 03:50, 3 February 2008 (CST)
::I like the attempt to give a mathy description of go, and the analysis of a the 1 point and 2 point boards was okay. But the intro led me to believe I'd see a comparison of the variety of rules systems in use.
::I want to leave this page with a firm grasp of the difference between Japanese and Chinese rules for scoring, and why it is that some tournaments use [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~wjh/go/rules/KSS.html Ing's SST Rules of Go]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 22:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
:::The use of the term "group" here doesn't correspond to what I understand to be normal English-language go usage, where it means a number of stones near each other, whether connected or not. If they're connected they're called a chain. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 10:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
:::See [[Talk:Go_%28board_game%29#.22Group.22]]. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 11:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
:::: This article contains interesting information, but I am not happy with it. It is not really suitable as a (detailed) explanation of the rules for those who want to learn them -- the differences are much too marginal even for advanced players. The main rules should be clearly separated from tournament rules (e.g., byo-yomi). The (mathematical) theory of the game and the different counting methods would deserve their own page(s). --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 18:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:44, 23 March 2011

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Definition [?]
 Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  Please add a brief definition or description.
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category:  Games [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  British English
To do.

Metadata here


Should this be a subpage of Go? --Robert W King 20:31, 1 February 2008 (CST)

A few people thought that the mathy description wasn't appropriate for the main Go article. In addition I think the article is long enough (and it will grow when I have time to fill out the points that don't have text at the moment) to warrant it's own article. Someone who just wants to see what Go is about doesn't need to understand the nuances of the different rule sets. Christian Kleineidam 03:50, 3 February 2008 (CST)
I like the attempt to give a mathy description of go, and the analysis of a the 1 point and 2 point boards was okay. But the intro led me to believe I'd see a comparison of the variety of rules systems in use.
I want to leave this page with a firm grasp of the difference between Japanese and Chinese rules for scoring, and why it is that some tournaments use Ing's SST Rules of Go. --Ed Poor 22:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
The use of the term "group" here doesn't correspond to what I understand to be normal English-language go usage, where it means a number of stones near each other, whether connected or not. If they're connected they're called a chain. Peter Jackson 10:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
See Talk:Go_(board_game)#.22Group.22. Peter Jackson 11:05, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
This article contains interesting information, but I am not happy with it. It is not really suitable as a (detailed) explanation of the rules for those who want to learn them -- the differences are much too marginal even for advanced players. The main rules should be clearly separated from tournament rules (e.g., byo-yomi). The (mathematical) theory of the game and the different counting methods would deserve their own page(s). --Peter Schmitt 18:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Go,_the_rules_of&oldid=400632"