Talk:Conkers

Canadian variation

In Canada, we play "chestnuts". It's mainly the same, except that rather than dangling your chestnut from its string, you place it in a shallow pit on the ground. I don't recall any scoring/rating system. Since this is "original research", I'm just mentioning it here. Somegeek 16:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In Newfoundland (at least in the 1960s), conkers was played as described in this article. Silverchemist (talk) 15:03, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radio 1 Conker Championships

The stuff about Radio 1 is of very limited value or interest and should be reduced to a one-line mention.

Agreed. The Radio 1 competition is barely notable and will probably fizzle out after a couple of years. I've moved the whole section to Radio 1 Conker Championships where it might be VfD'able but probably harmless. -- Solipsist 07:53, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think its at least interesting enough to leave in the article, is it really breaking anything to mention a bit of pop culture which relates to conkers?

Terminology

When I was young, I remember that sometimes you got 'deformed' conkers, shaped a bit like a wedge. We called these cheese-cutters (and very useful weapons if you could strike with the 'sharp' edge).

Yes. This occurs when two are encased together. In fact, I'm tempted to request a citation for the assertion (in the opening paragraph) that ordinary conkers are known as cheesers. Grant (talk) 12:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

I propose that this article is moved from Conker to Conkers. The article is about the game, which is called conkers. A conker is the seed of a conker tree, and therefore has its own article, horse chestnut. The general convention for singular article titles does not apply in this case, as the game is "conkers" in the plural. I've entered the proposal in WP:Requested Moves. Richard New Forest (talk) 13:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Agree. Do it. Sarah777 (talk) 18:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No objection, but I think the lead needs some work first. It's not obvious from reading the intro that this is an article about the game. PC78 (talk) 03:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quite right – will do after name change, if no-one beats me to it. Richard New Forest (talk) 13:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK - that's a promise?! As we seem to be stuck I'll change the name. Sarah777 (talk) 19:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already done - 'cept for this page....Sarah777 (talk) 19:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have no fear, I've moved the talk-page (to correspond with the page). GoodDay (talk) 22:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have a classic "too many cooks" situation here! Sarah777 (talk) 09:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page move now done successfully, after old "Conkers" page kindly deleted by admin. Lead para adjusted and rename tag removed. Richard New Forest (talk) 08:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of name

"The name comes from the dialect word conker, meaning snail-shell (related to French conque meaning a conch), as the game was originally played using snail shells. The name may also be influenced by the verb conquer, as the game was also called conquerors. Conkers are also known regionally as obblyonkers, cheggies or cheesers. In America the nuts are simply known as chestnuts or as buckeyes, and the game is not played."

I grew up in Buffalo, NY and certainly in the 1950's and 1960's the game was played. We also played "clackers" where two chestnuts would be tied at either end of a string. Holding the string in the middle and yanking it up and down would cause the two chestnuts to clack together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Damercer (talk • contribs) 18:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional citations needed

This subject highlights a general problem with the Wikipedia rules: you can have an assertion that literally thousands of people (in this case British schoolchildren) know from first-hand experience to be true; but because it isn't written down anywhere, it's not eligible for Wikipedia.

Rugby songs are another such subject. There are probably lots more. Paul Magnussen (talk) 18:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This may be Wiki's single biggest weakness; it misses a crucial part of every picture. Sarah777 (talk) 14:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ref date

At time of my writing these words, it is 21 Sep 09. Reference 10 on the page is a date in the future (7 Oct 09). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.3.26 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the actual item cited, it's dated 7 Oct 2004.96.54.53.165 (talk) 22:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]