Talk:Buffalo (game)

This article was nominated for deletion on May 3, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This line: "In theory, one would be allowed to drink with one's dominant hand if one were driving a vehicle with a stick-shift operated by one's non-dominant hand; but since drinking and driving is (sometimes lethally) dangerous, it should never be done. " should be removed. To even make the suggestion of drinking and driving is completely irresponsible. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chipahoy82 (talk • contribs)

I suppose whoever added it thought it was witty. It wasn't particularily funny and it didn't add anything to the article as I've never heard of this as a "rule" of the game, so I removed it. It's worth pointing out, though, that if a reputable source was found that drinking with your non-dominant hand while operating a stick shift is an official "rule", it would belong, regardless of the irresponsibility of it. - dharm a bum 23:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i'll be damned but this game sucks if your playing with someone who is ambidextrious... -chris

actually, i found rules on a canadian site that state you observe the person and see which is more dominant. have them do a task or something. Ceol3531 08:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is truly ambidextirous... even those who have a freakish level of skill prefer to use one hand or the other for the most basic of tasks, such as writing. What you need to do to confirm their preference, if they are adept enough to fool anyone, is observe them in situations where they have no reason to prefer one hand over the other - signing a cheque, that kind of thing. But honestly, it's a bit of a moot point - the number of people in this world who can write well enough with both hands to fool someone asking are very few - and, let's face it, if you have an ability that cool, using it to cheat at Buffalo is one of the least interesting but more amusing things you could do, so more power to them. dharmabum 10:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone tell me why all the changes have been reversed - constantly being asked to cite references. What if you are the reference. There are loads of great pieces of info that has been removed. The original author does not have any reliable references, just other websites. Does anyone know the full truth of the history, it is full of myth and mayhem. Please stop undoing changes and let us all enjoy the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.107.7.250 (talk) 20:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll explain. In short, Wikipedia has a policy (Wikipedia:No original research) that says that you need a source other than yourself, and you can't write original work here. It also has a policy (Wikipedia:Notability) that says that there's a minimum standard for notability in inclusion. While the game as a whole is notable, the way a couple buddies on the Isle of Man play it is not. As for "enjoying the page", this is an encyclopedia article, and the enjoyment is in writing something for the world to read, while still keeping it serious and professional! Oreo Priest ^talk 23:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for taking the time to answer. Your version of the game is based on "folk origin". There are many versions out there that are simple fact, because they are happening. There are many origins out there for the start of the game. These will not be written up in 'papers', it is a fun drinking game, we do not write papers on the game. People should be allowed to put up their version based on real experience. Your derogatory comment about "the way a couple buddies on the Isle of Man play it" is unhelpful and basically rude, I won't delete it even though it is your opinion and does not have any original research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.107.7.250 (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I'm sorry if you think it's rude; I was trying to phrase it so that it's clear why it's not notable. As for what people "should" be allowed to do, for better or for worse the policies that Wikipedia only include things that are both notable and veritably true are deeply entrenched and not likely to change any time soon. Oreo Priest ^talk 06:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Buffalo (game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090401085945/http://www.mysanantonio.com:80/news/education/UTSA_frat_kicked_out_for_hazing.html to http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/UTSA_frat_kicked_out_for_hazing.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:49, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]