Talk:Go-Stop

I will be starting this article, don't expect much I'm 14 and haven't written many essays. If you see a mistake about the game, or something in my writing, please go ahead and change it so. I will be giving a refer page after I have written the article. I have one, but I left it somewhere not within the reach of my hands at the moment. Thecutnut (talk) 02:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Which cards do not look like they match? Brett (talk) 06:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

INLS Peer Review

Strengths:

• The use of Korean words in the article in parentheses made it seem more authentic
• The fact that the ways to deal to both 2 and 3 players was explained very well made it easy to understand how to get the game started
• The use of links within wikipedia was well done, showed knowledge of how to write a wikipedia artice
• The general setup of the article was nice
• It seems that this article would be very helpful for people who needed a refresher in the game

Weaknesses

• This article is confusing for people new to the game
• The card system could use some more clarification - it was confusing since I had never played the game before
• Did not quite explain what scoring a 3 or a 7 meant in gameplay, therefore did not explain exactly how the game ends
• The Rule should be The Rules

Additional Resources

• Seems that most of the explanation had been found via the two resources that were given in the article
• Additional resources could be used if you were to add any pictures of the cards to this article - searching google images may be a solid place to start

Questions about the Information Being Referenced

• What information was found where? It seems that with any game there is a lot of common knowledge that can be used, but with the resources cited, which ones were used with what areas of your article? Fixing this would add to the legitimacy of the article
• Is there an instruction manual that came with the game/cards that you could reference? This source would have the authority necessary, while removing any doubt of your sources

How to Improve

• Perhaps you could search the internet for pictures of the various types of cards that are involved in this game and add a section on that - would also have use additional resources for this
• Perhaps you can add a section on background history - it was just something that I thought might be interesting if there was a cool history behind it
• In the rules section, you could very easily break all the information down into subsections, such as 1 Choosing a dealer 2 How to deal 3 the rules of gameplay, or something along those lines

Overall Review: Acceptable (+)

Depolomd (talk) 00:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Jenny,

I felt like your article was very well done and it is a great place to start. The first thing I noticed when reading your article was that it is hard to explain a card game in words! For that reason you need to be very careful with the way you present the directions. I think that you have done a great job with it, but as you continue to edit the page, pay special attention to how clear the directions are. One thing that you might want to check out is referencing a video from youtube. Since I know nothing about the game other than what you wrote in the article, I couldn't be sure about a good video or not, but I checked some out by searching "Go Stop Card Game" on youtube and found this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdur3-bMdJ0. Also, as the other reviewer said, and image or something would really help the appearance and format of your article.

Your article was written from a non-biased point of view, and you seemed to include everything that would be essential in learning a card game. As far as research goes, I don't think number of sources is very important, but once again they way you communicate the information found in those sources is. As a whole this is a great start to a very interesting article. Good luck with the rest! Sjperry (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Great work!

I feel that your article is very rigid and precise for a beginner to learn how to play the game which is great. There are only some minor changes i would make.

I would suggest maybe making the titles of "animal cards," "ribbon cards", etc. in bold to place them/set them apart when reading it for more fluidity and clarity. I would also put the part explaining that this is typically a 2-player game but can be more in the "Setup" section instead of in the introduction. Also, this may be a long shot, but it would be neat if you could find some background information or history behind the game, where it originated, how, why? Maybe its popularity in the United States or where it is most played.

Great work and the game sounds really interesting! -Brooks Powell —Preceding unsigned comment added by Powellmb (talk • contribs) 14:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

---

It is hard to think of suggestions that have not already been made for your page; it is well formatted, simple, and easy to understand.

The main thing I think you could work on would be spicing up the appearance of the page through use of pictures and perhaps a YouTube video about how the game is played (perhaps one of people actually playing the game). You have a nice link to the Japanese Flower cards, but maybe you could add a simple picture to show people what they look like.

I know that it is difficult to explain card games through words alone, so you may want to re-read what you have written and perhaps add a video for clarification. Altogether I thought you did a wonderful job, keep it up! Wduckett (talk) 17:35, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:NOT

Instruction manuals. While Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places and things, a Wikipedia article should not read like a how-to style manual of instructions, advice (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestions, or contain how-tos. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides and recipes.[5] If you are interested in a how-to style manual, you may want to look at wikiHow or our sister project Wikibooks.

This article is in desperate need of content other than the rules. Wikipedia is not an instruction manual and currently other than a couple sentences in the lead that is all it is. I can't imagine how a peer review could be done and claim this article was remotely acceptable. There needs to be content here about the history of the game, when was it introduced, who played it, how have the cards evolved, have the rules evolved, who plays it now, why do they play it (talk about the gambling aspect), talk about societies views of the game, etc. --221.138.100.168 (talk) 06:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)