Jump to content

Talk:Sabacc

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleSabacc has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 15, 2022Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on July 7, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that neither holochess (dejarik) nor sabacc, two games invented for the Star Wars films, have a definitive ruleset despite several real-world licensed releases?

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk05:06, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 06:04, 4 May 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • Both articles are new enough, long enough, QPQs done, no image, pass earwig. Hook is okay, though it is somewhat wordy. Can we strengthen the hook? --evrik (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt1 ... that neither holochess nor sabacc, two games featured in the Star Wars movies, have a definitive real-world rule-set?
Here is my take. --evrik (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Evrik hasn't edited in a week so we many need a new reviewer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:42, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Popping in here. I like the sound of a compromise:
ALT2: ... that neither holochess nor sabacc, two games invented for the Star Wars films, have a definitive ruleset despite several real-world licensed releases?
Clarifies the 'invented for' and also gives the reason you'd actually care why they don't have definitive rules -- because they have actual real-world licensed releases. Also switched 'movies' to 'films', which is subtle but frees us up a couple characters (important with the length!) and sounds better encyclopedically in more or less anything that's not a direct quote. Vaticidalprophet 14:08, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vaticidalprophet, Thanks, I am fine with the ALT2. Now who'll check it for GTG? :) PS. Check Alt2a below, which adds the alt name dejarik to the hook. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2a: ... that neither holochess (dejarik) nor sabacc, two games invented for the Star Wars films, have a definitive ruleset despite several real-world licensed releases?
I think the more interesting thing here is that they were games created in-universe that have also been played in real-life. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:10, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:42, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Narutolovehinata5, I favor my own ALT2 but I am not objecting to ALT3, it's pretty much subjective which facts we find more interesting. Being a board gamer I find the clashing rulesets of interesting but I fully admit this is a subjective POV. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:40, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sabacc/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kusma (talk · contribs) 10:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will review this one shortly. —Kusma (talk) 10:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Progress and general comments

[edit]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Content and prose review

[edit]
  • Lead: Some cites in the lead can be ok (MOS:LEADCITE, but this is overkill
  • primarily-fictional better without hyphen
  • Mention real world versions in lead?
  • History: perhaps you could do this chronologically, and consider separating in-film/book information from the real world sales of games?
    Works for me. —Kusma (talk) 13:50, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I take it that the "sabacca" didn't make it into the final version of the screenplay? Is this a primary source or is there commentary in the screenplays book?
  • I had to check Wookieepedia to learn that fictional Sabacc has some high-tech "shifting" features. Is it correct that the name wasn't trademarked until 2018?
  • The citation overkill makes me worried (more than three citations for a single sentence are usually a sign that something is wrong).
  • the first mention of the game at which tables Han won his starship is disentangle the prose
  • Can you try to discuss the different real world versions a bit more separately? I'm a bit confused as to what is what and how they differ. For example, this Galaxy's Edge Sabacc seems to include dice? What are the dice for?
    • The problem is that there are next to no RS for this, reviews are few and not very reliable, and I am not fond of using manuals (primary sources) - plus some of them seem not even available online. Differences between editions would be good to discuss but I am afraid we are crossing into fancruft/OR territory given that most differences are not covered by RSes. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, I was kind of wondering whether we're getting into notability questions here. The real-world importance seemed to me to be mostly shown by the real-world games, but if we can't say anything about them other than that they exist... —Kusma (talk) 14:07, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rules: I find it confusing to have an "original ruleset" mentioned: which one do you mean as there is no "official" ruleset? Do players draw cards to improve their hand? There seem to be two betting pots in these rules. What is the object of the Galaxy's Edge Sabacc game if there is no betting?
    • I mean, there is no one official ruleset. And yes, some stuff is unclear - blame the lack of sources, reliable or otherwise. Like, I can't even find out which year the Disneyland's Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge-themed area was released, exactly. The game is notable, but the nitty-gritty details about it are very hard to dig out. Like, when you ask "What is the object of the Galaxy's Edge Sabacc game if there is no betting?" - I don't know, the source doesn't say, although the object is likely to win :) How, the source doesn't say, we could try to find the rulebook - although if it's not online, it's not going to be easy - and then we could describe the rules but PRIMARY is the problem. Also there are some copyright concerns as to whether we can reproduce the rules on Wikipedia in detail, plus WP:NOTAGUIDE/how-to/manual. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's quite a bit of work to do here. I'll come back later to assess sourcing quality a bit more. —Kusma (talk) 11:02, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • About some new additions/other things I found:
    Sabacc was also used as part of the movie promotional campaign before its official launch a bit mangled, c/e this sentence. (I did some light copyediting here and there, you may want to look through the article again)
    A reviewer for the Games International drop "the" or add "magazine" or something
    players can fold - but have no reason to do so choose something other than the hyphen per MOS:DASH. Comma, spaced endash, unspaced emdash, whatever.
    Double check for typos, I found several.
    BoardGameGeek isn't a reliable source, and you don't need it?
  • I think I'm mostly through reading this, happy to look at further edits. Will put on hold (mostly for accounting reasons). —Kusma (talk) 21:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kusma All done I think, except the fair use image. I am having trouble choosing the best one and I am still uneasy about fair use in general. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Piotrus: See comments above for image. I think a little more in the lead about the importance (just add the Han/Lando game) could help. Then we're probably done. While this just about passes "broadness", we're quite a bit away from "comprehensiveness" so please don't FA nominate this before finding more on the reception and covering how the game passed out of canon and back in. —Kusma (talk) 14:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kusma I've expanded the lead. I'd rather not add the fair use image as the more I think about it the more I am concerned such a use could be disputed :( Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Piotrus: OK, fair enough. I think fair use on enwiki is a bit more relaxed now than it was 15 years ago, but perhaps that's just me. I'll do the paperwork and promote this now. —Kusma (talk) 14:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Brimmicombe-Wood, Lee (May 1990). "Rolegames". Games International (14): 40.

Unreliable but interesting fan analysis

[edit]

See https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1SEbTVki7Fji70U8UVr3k_uIyeDQ9a8hlhYlhPNWEmCk/edit#slide=id.g3c214fa683_0_10 . Pretty solid work, but not really something we can cite. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]