Talk:The Turk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article The Turk is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 6, 2007.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Chess (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chess, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chess on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article is in the list of Selected articles that are shown on the Portal:Chess.
WikiProject Turkey (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Hungary (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
 
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.

Hatnote[edit]

I don't understand why amazon had got listed here, it looks like commercial promotion. 'The Turk' could just as well refer to 'The Turk' in Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. Anyway it's all cover in Turk so the following appears suitable.

This page is about the chess-playing automaton. For other uses, see Turk.

SunCreator (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I placed it in the hatnote. I did it because Mechanical Turk redirects to this article and Mechanical Turk is probably the first place people would be looking for the article about the Amazon.com company Amazon Mechanical Turk. I therefore think either Mechanical Turk has to get disambiguated to mention Amazon Mechanical Turk or Amazon Mechanical Turk has to get mentioned in the hatnote in this article. With just two subjects to be disambiguated between, I thought it would be best stick it in the hatnote of this article. Alternatively, Mechanical Turk could redirect to Amazon Mechanical Turk and then that article could have a hatnote leading to this article, because I don't know how commonly The Turk is referred to as The Mechanical Turk.TheFreeloader (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I understand. There has been since 2008 a Mechanical Turk (disambiguation) page. I have re-direct Mechanical Turk to it as suggested above. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 04:00, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Alternative text[edit]

This page currently is without the alternative text required of FA candidates. Use of this tool, could be useful. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

It's no longer required, actually. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC).
Correct. My message was overtaken by events that removed WP:ALT from FA for the present time. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:11, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Some Links[edit]

I have the text to 16 historical articles on the Turk (as well as some concerning other Automatons) here: http://blog.chess.com/batgirl/chess-automatons-by-sarah-beth . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Batgirl (talkcontribs) 13:30, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

About Poe's essay.[edit]

This part in the article is incorrect : "though many of Poe's hypotheses were incorrect (such as that a chess-playing machine must always win, and the Turk sometimes lost)"

In Poe's essay he uses the fact that The Turk loses sometimes as proof that it is not a pure machine, and in this respect he is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.136.3 (talk) 01:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that follows. Since a machine can lose, this doesn't imply anything. His reasoning was faulty even if the conclusion was correct. Quale (talk) 01:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

That is up for debate, but I think it would be more prudent to include something that Poe actually got incorrect (as the passage states). An example of this would be that he thought the operator would view the chess board through the torso of the Turk figure, when in fact the operator could not see the board at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.136.3 (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Do either of you have the Levitt book? At any rate, if the earlier part of the text is in Levitt's book, don't remove the reference. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:12, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't, but the point is that "The Turk sometimes lost, therefore it can't be a pure machine" is an example of a faulty argument. The premise (or hypothesis) that a machine can never lose is incorrect. I don't see how that's debatable. I removed the "and the Turk sometimes lost" bit as it isn't relevant to giving an example of an incorrect hypothesis. Quale (talk) 03:20, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
That is the way I interpret it too. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:43, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I looked up the specific passage in MAELZEL'S CHESS-PLAYER, which is:
3. The Automaton does not invariably win the game. Were the machine a pure machine this would not be the case — it would always win. The principle being discovered by which a machine can be made to play a game of chess, an extension of the same principle would enable it to win a game — a farther extension would enable it to win all games — that is, to beat any possible game of an antagonist. A little consideration will convince any one that the difficulty of making a machine beat all games, is not in the least degree greater, as regards the principle of the operations necessary, than that of making it beat a single game.
Poe was a smart guy, but that just doesn't make any sense. Quale (talk) 00:15, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Even about 30 years ago my father thought that a computer would necessarily always beat a human. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:04, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
The idea of the infallible machine was of course dramatized in 2001! Ihardlythinkso (talk) 01:17, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Not that this is really relevant to the article itself, but to clarify why someone might think the machine would invariably win is because the (faulty) assumption was that the reason the computer was winning is because it had all possible moves and countermoves preprogrammed. Even Deep Blue doesn't have all moves preprogrammed, as the total number of possibilities is astronomically large. However, even if this were somehow the case, then the statement almost stands such as in tic-tac-toe. If you know the process, you will either win or tie all the time, but never lose. (not a Wikipedia user)

Revealing the secrets section[edit]

"In 1827 the Journal of the Franklin Institute did bring one of this often reprinted articles.". What is this sentence meant to say? It doesn't make sense to me. 83.183.116.114 (talk) 00:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

John Gaughan demonstrated his version of the Turk on History Channel's: Lost Magic Decoded on October 18, 2012, hosted by Steve Cohen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.82.147.5 (talk) 02:06, 19 October 2012 (UTC)