Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Archive 2011

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconContract bridge Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Contract bridge, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Contract bridge 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.Contract bridgeWikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridgeTemplate:WikiProject Contract bridgeContract bridge articles
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Go to archive: 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 Some Talk posted here is relocated to appropriate project subpages.

Forcing bid discussion[edit]

 – --Newwhist (talk) 16:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Defenses over 1NT[edit]

 – --Newwhist (talk) 17:15, 29 August 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Suit templates[edit]

Resolved
 – New templates created subsequently

I'm pretty sure everyone's pissed off by having to type <font color="red...> or <span style="color:red"> to get the red suit symbols right. We were previously discussing the possibility to make few templates which would take care of that and save some typing; the problem was that the previous Wikipedia policy or guideline (if it was anything of it) kind of discouraged overuse of templates (and those ones could be used many times indeed). I raised the issue several times and always got some indeterminate answers (which didn't include "DON'T" recently).

Well, what the heck; I'm gonna create {{Cs}}, {{Ds}} {{Hs}}, {{Ss}}. Feel free to use them throughout the articles (but without an urge to replace old codes). Duja 09:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

very useful, thanks! JocK 18:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
excellentAbtract 21:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above-noted templates have subsequently been superceded by: {{spades}} to render ♠, {{hearts}} to render ♥, {{diamonds}} to render ♦, and {{clubs}} to render ♣ Newwhist (talk) 17:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Useful space principle[edit]

Moved to Talk:Useful Space Principle
 – --Newwhist (talk) 17:59, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guidelines[edit]

We should have some guidelines about various things. Please improve and add to what I've got here.

"Notable" Players[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:08, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Convention article content[edit]

Articles on conventions should include the topics listed below, where applicable, and preferably in the same order. If the article is long enough to place the topics in separate sections, use the section names provided.

  • A basic description of the convention (introduction, no section name)
  • Specific bids and meanings == Details ==
  • Followup bidding == Followup bidding ==
  • Considerations for when to use/not use the convention== When to use {{PAGENAME}}==
  • Defenses against the convention == Defenses against {{PAGENAME}} ==
  • Sample auctions == Sample auctions ==
  • History of the convention == History ==
  • Comments on regional use/regulation == Regional use ==
  • Variations (either in the main article or as links) == Variations ==
  • Related conventions == Related conventions == (or in == See also ==)
  • Category:Bridge conventions

Articles must have a minimum of at least four of these items or be labeled stubs.

Matchups 02:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Card spacing[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 01:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ely Culbertson[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:15, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality of Bridge Players[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:17, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Emanuel Lasker[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Five-card majors[edit]

The current article Five-card majors says that five-card majors is a convention; it's talk page directs me here. Five-card majors is a common and standard bidding system (or part thereof) and not a convention, is it not? Newwhist (talk) 13:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's not a convention. It's not exactly a bidding system either, though as you say it can be part of one. Perhaps "style" or "treatment" might be the best description? JH (talk page) 17:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a "natural convention", as weird as that may sound. Pcap ping 00:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We should try to be consistent in use of natural, artificial, treatment, and convention. If so, then our Glossary entries should explain our consistent usage. Has anyone compared the Official Encyclopedia and the glossaries at ACBL and Bridge World to see whether there is disagreement about usage? Is there another important source in the English-speaking bridge world? --P64 (talk) 22:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See also Talk:Glossary of contract bridge terms#Treatment and that article. --P64 (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment on Biographies of living people[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bridge teams[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WPCB banner[edit]

There should be a section on use of the WPCB banner. Should talk pages for all articles in "bridge Categories" carry it? Are there any crucial or recommended parameters? --P64 (talk) 00:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, but it seems standard to put a project banner on the discussion (talk) pages. I looked at a couple of other projects and some do likewise. I guess it gives individual editors a heads-up that there is a group trying to collectively work on the article and that it is part of a family of articles. I think even 'junky' articles should be tagged so that in due course they can be rated as to notability and quality and the appropriate ones deleted, otherwise who would know where they are? Newwhist (talk) 01:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise they would be identified only by placement in some bridge Category. Some automatic tools depend on the banner. I'll take your advice. Thanks --P64 (talk) 17:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Newwhist has confirmed Wiki policy that "the project banner should be placed at the top of every talk page of every article considered part of the project" (below,Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge#Quality and importance assessment). --probably also every Category. --P64 (talk) 20:22, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yesterday I added the banner to Talk pages of David Bruce (bridge) and Richard Freeman (bridge). I learned that the shortcut {WPCB} automatically generates ?? class and ?? importance assessments.
I didn't specify either parameter value, although I have opinions about that! --P64 (talk) 22:54, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You are right! I have finally gotten around to implementing basic assessment tools for contract bridge articles with respect to quality and importance. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge/Assessment for a description of the basics - the system is essentially the standard Wiki approach using the project banner. As the summary table on the foregoing page shows, most articles are Unassessed in their quality and importance and the ones that are done were ones I did as a means of 'testing' the functionality of the system. Any WikiProject member is free to assess articles but I personally believe that some more 'how to do this' guidelines are required to be added as to what in the Wiki contract bridge world is justification for each of the rankings in quality and in importance. This is all preliminary stuff; much more to come. Any feedback? Please provide it at the talk page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge/Assessment. Thanks. Newwhist (talk) 00:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently the banner should be used on the talk pages for all of those Project pages, Category pages, Template pages, and Template documentation (Template talk:title/doc) that are in the project. (Thus should reveal at a glance which of the Templates we claim does have documentation in a subpage.)

I have used {WPCB} in my User space without much consideration, most recently while drafting Template:WBFpeople at User:P64/Sandbox and User:P64/Sandbox/doc, with the template {WPCB} in their talk pages (since exported to Template space). Visiting one of our Categories today, I noticed also that I have put some of my User pages in Contract bridge categories. At the moment, these are two things I feel I should mention. Probably the use of {WPCB} and Categories should be postponed until a page goes live, or the page should be formally included in the project by an announcement here; say, Newwhist announces that there is a draft of some MOS at User:Newwhist/blahblah. --P64 (talk) 17:50, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies and people in categories[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs[edit]

In my opinion scads of the flagged Stubs are Starts at least, so many that I suppose I have finer gradations in mind. I have removed the flag (rmv Stub) at Astro (convention), which is far advanced, but I will not yet go further. See Asptro for example.

Biographies. (1) The section Bridge accomplishments lists achievements and perhaps awards or honors. The feature is reasonably standardized, very common, and independent of Stub status. For examle, Benito Garozzo and Giorgio Belladonna are both stubs although the former includes Bridge accomplishments and mentions Garozzo's current US citizenship. (2) Newwhist, you edited Bobby Wolff today. It's more advanced that Garozzo albeit silent on all but his bridge career. Do you consider it a stub? --P64 (talk) 19:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this project does or formerly did intend to use only a few of the available grades. Stub class may be more useful than others if it alone is (a) coded in the article, or (b) displayed at the foot of the article, or (c) enhanced by tool that lists them all. --P64 (talk) 18:54, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki policy apparently gives three necessary conditions including (i) that a stub contains "only a few sentences of text". It counsels "be bold in removing stub tags". Yet I wonder whether Stub class is valuable here on grounds (abc) and whether one of those is irreplaceable at present. --P64 (talk) 19:43, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the stub deignation on bridge related articles seems to be overused. Presumabably, few are removing the stub when editing an article. I admit to paying little attention to them until more recently when doing some review on the issues of quality and importance - see new thread topic below. In future editing efforts, I will "be bold" and delete them as appropriate. Newwhist (talk) 17:49, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quality and importance assessment of articles[edit]

In thinking about the needs of the bridge project, it is clear that we do not differentiate the articles on the basis of importance or quality like many projects do and I think it is time to start. Doing so is an essential component of setting priorities, measuring progress and letting editors choose where to put their time and energy. Accordingly, I have been roaming the Wiki "help pages" (a near oxymoron) and have come up with additions to the {{tl|WPCB]] for discussion. See sample. It draws on the standard Wiki definitions for importance and quality. If there are no objections, I will implement shortly.Newwhist (talk) 17:49, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the status of sections 4.1 and 5? Are they both reproduced here for reference, section 5 being recommended and general and section 4.1 being the current specification for WPCB Games? (I'll copy this note to the sample discussion page. Done.) --P64 (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They are reproduced only for general reference to be able to quickly see what others have done. While it is possible to customize the rating systems, I am inclined to think we should adopt the 'standard' rating systems for quality and importance. I do notice that different projects cite their own examples - see last columns. Newwhist (talk) 11:59, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, while roaming through the help pages,I encountered explicit confirmation that the project banner should be placed at the top of every talk page of every aticle considered part of the project. I think it was P64 who was asking about that but I couldn't remember where it was so I could put in this nugget of information. Newwhist (talk) 17:49, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have noted this two sections up (WPCB banner). --P64 (talk) 20:28, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the assessment parameters have been enabled.--P64 (talk) 20:28, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see that Newwhist has used these Edit Summaries,
  • assess —set parameter values
  • add current assessments —pipe parameter names without parameter values, namely
{{WikiProject Contract bridge}} => {{WikiProject Contract bridge|class=|importance=}}
(For the latter I used add WPCB assessment parameters last hour at Talk:World Mind Sports Games.)
--P64 (talk) 23:30, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citing the ACBL Official Encyclopedia[edit]

Maybe we should agree on one best use of the template {cite book} and make it available for copy-and-paste --verbatim paste when citing the 6th edition without any article title or page number; otherwise paste and modify. While skimming the template documentation I have tinkered with the citation coded by User:Newwhist at Forcing bid. --P64 (talk) 22:11, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Newwhist: You have reverted the use of {cite book} for OEB6 at Forcing bid. Note that one of my tweaks was to fix a typo by deleting the final ")". --P64 (talk) 22:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi P64. You are reading my mind! I had already started to do as you suggest. See here. I intended to make a master reference list in a new section in the contract bridge project page for use as cut and paste for references. Go ahead and copy my text, improve it and post it for availability in the contract bridge project page. Newwhist (talk) 23:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Biographical data[edit]

Newwhist (talk) 02:40, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

7th Encyclopedia forthcoming[edit]

The 7th edition Official Encyclopedia of Bridge is expected this year. The ACBL membership monthly Bridge Bulletin has explained some change in format and has offered some discount price for advance purchase. If there is information about sale to non-members or distribution overseas, I'll try to remember to post notice here. --P64 (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The current Bulletin says that it goes to press August 31. --P64 (talk) 20:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It is published and can be bought or ordered at bookstore. Got my copy yesterday - looks and feels great - comes with two CDs, one of which is a PDF of the whole printed edition; the other CD is on biographies and the results of competitions not in the printed edition. Newwhist (talk) 21:42, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Have they corrected their strange omission of Paul Stern in earlier editions? JH (talk page) 22:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No mention of him other than in the article on the Vienna System where he is acknowledged as having devised it; no bio details anywhere. They appear only interested in ACBL members. The following is the explanation in the Introduction to the CD on biographies:

"This CD and its contents represent a departure from the way the top players in the bridge world receive acknowledgement for their achievements. In the past, the printed pages of the Official Encyclopedia of Bridge contained a section for the names of noteworthy figures in bridge. The early criterion for inclusion was primarily tournament success. At one time, a minimum number of regional wins was the requisite. Then along came bracketed knockout teams, and the tournament landscape changed forever. The editors of this book discussed new criteria at length and finally settled on an objective benchmark that, in the end, is still based on masterpoints. It was decided that all Life Masters with Diamond rank or higher will be listed in the biographies section. The amount of information presented for each entry is largely the product of the individual’s motivation to contribute. In the five years since work on this edition of this Encyclopedia began, there have been numerous notices in a variety of venues about the editors’ desire to flesh out biographies with interesting – and not necessarily bridge-related – data. Some have responded laudably. Others ignored the entreaties. All Diamond, Emerald, Platinum and Grand Life Masters are listed on this CD. Those who provided no information will be listed by their names only. For those who are disappointed not to be in the main part of the Encyclopedia, consider that the list would be a fraction of the current length if an effort was made to squeeze the names onto the printed pages. Finally, using this format makes it easier to update all the lists on this CD, including the results of major tournaments. As for the biographies, if you neglected to send suitable information for the 2011 version, you may have another chance two years hence."

Newwhist (talk) 23:31, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. That's a pity. I think that any bridge encyclopaedia ought to have a biography of such a significant figure in the history of the game. JH (talk page) 07:47, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt they know he is not included, or know the cuts made during previous updates. They should have digitized the entries for all editions in one table, but I doubt they have done it. If/when I am able to inspect a copy, I will do some cross-check, and begin with prewar people including all members of the 1937 Austria teams. :::::: Does the CD include every entry in the book?
Really a CD should reprint every entry cut from past editions. Offhand I think I might emphasize biographical entries, in particular, in constructive criticism toward the likely update two years hence.
--P64 (talk) 15:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Desirable template[edit]

The given code and given expansion are suggestions only. Details may vary depending on the whether primary use in References or in External links is expected. Perhaps alternative expansions, not given here, can be toggled with another parameter.

Link to any Glossary entry with defined id[edit]

 Done 2011-11-03

It will be useful to develop this template

Link to any Glossary entry with defined id
{wpcbglossary | id=team}
=>team
2011-10-06. drafted at User:P64/Sandbox. For example,
{{User:P64/Sandbox |team |teams-of-four}} generates
[illustration disabled 2013-02-15; the draft is no longer available]
which is linked to the Glossary entry "team". The draft uses two parameter values. If only one is provided, it should be used twice, but I don't know that yet.
This needs a name, perhaps {Glossarycb}? {Gwpcb}? {WPCBg}? --P64 (talk) 19:34, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
2011-10-07. The title must be capitalized but title Template:Gcb supports call by lowercase {gcb}, which is quick to type and easy to remember? Same for 'Gcbt' and {gcbt} —initialism for 'Glossary of contract bridge terms', the article title. So I suggest 'Gcb' or 'Gcbt'. --P64 (talk) 17:12, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
DONE {{gcb}} 2011-11-01. Quoting the documentation, quote
In the simplest cases, the code ''{{gcb|id='' and ''}}'' surrounds the glossary term just as code ''[['' and '']]'' surrounds the article title for the simplest link to a Wikipedia article.
unquote --P64 (talk) 21:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
IMPROVED {{gcb}} 2011-11-03. After today's revision,
  • in the simplest case, the code {{gcb| and }} surrounds the glossary term
  • the glossary term is the value of both parameters.
This works as-presumably-intended if the term does appear in the glossary and serves as its own id there. For example,
{{gcb|deal}}
displays
deal
which is linked to the glossary entry 'Deal'. --P64 (talk) 14:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Link to any player record at WBF[edit]

 Done 2011-10-06

It may be useful to develop these templates.

Link to any player record at WBF.
{wbfplayer | id=325}
=> Zia Mahmood player record at the World Bridge Federation
I have used that expansion in References and in External links.
DONE {{WBFpeople}} 2011-10-06. See Template:WBFpeople.
As I write it is in use only at Rixi Markus#External links. --P64 (talk) 19:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cite any entry in The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge[edit]

 Done 2011-10-08

Cite any entry in The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge.
{OEB | id=Bermuda Bowl |edition=6 |page= }
=> "Bermuda Bowl", Official Encyclopedia of Bridge, edition 6.
Something like that.
DONE {{OEB}} by User:Newwhist. This currently uses page number only, not the article title, and its message begins with the Editor-in-Chief firstname lastname. For examples in current use see Ben Cohen (bridge). --P64 (talk) 17:29, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--P64 (talk) 23:13, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GYÖRGY FERENCZY (1902 -- 1983)[edit]

rec. 1958

GYÖRGY FERENCZY (1902 -- 1983)

A distinguished artist. An acknowledged interpreter of Chopin's, Schumann's, Schubert's and Scarlatti's oeuvres.

An eminent personality of the XX-th century Hungarian cultural life. He was a brilliant pianist instructed others by student of Ferenc Liszt: István Thomán as well as Ernő Dohnányi and Leó Weiner, instructions that were to be given to several outstanding artist (such as his student: György Cziffra -- deceased by now). His followers have beenand still are spreading a musical culture that is based on Liszt traditions not only in Hungary but also all over the world. Since 1920 he gave concerts regularly in nearly all European countries and significant cities. From 1947 onwards he was a teacher at the Ferenc Liszt Music Academy, becoming a department leader at the same institute in 1958. He was also the chief leader of a piano master training in Salzburg as well as member of the jury at plenty of international piano competitions. In addition, he was a beloved and popular member of various associations of artists. Last but not least, a European champion of bridge in 1938, and a silver medalist in 1935.

That is the caption for YouTube upload by gullivior 2011-06-23, "György Ferenczy plays Chopin Mazurka in F sharp minor Op. 59 No. 3".[1]
It does not belong here; not even the link belongs on this page.
Let me take the opportunity to say that I have HIDDEN some data the Categories of Bridge players by nationality: lists of names with diacritics, such as this one at Category:Norwegian bridge players
recent: Glenn Grøtheim, Erik Sælensminde, Ulf Håkon Tundal
1970: Erik Høie, Bjørn Larsen, Louis André Strøm, Willy Varnås
Perhaps I should follow the lead of User:Newwhist and a "resourceful" user space. I have not, yet. --P64 (talk) 16:31, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correspondence with WBF; name variations[edit]

Yesterday at Talk:Rixi Markus#WBF title, Newwhist says in small part, "I have sent an email today to the WBF making an enquiry but when I have done so in the past I have never received a reply or aknowledgement."

Newwhist, Have you sent only inquiries? Or sent any corrections such as every Bridge People page solicits in a footer?
A I Fleming (Great Britain) insertion 2011-09-13: that database uses lowercase L with dots
Irene (Dimmie) Fleming —The linked "comprehensive biography" is not at all ;) but it's enough to confirm that these records need to be identified.
She is Mrs. A. Leslie in my OEB, which may explain "A.I." (but names omit dots, compare "John C H Marx"). Otherwise it seems that they have failed to identify different names in underlying EBL and WBF player records. Or there may be a Great Britain vs little England problem.
I need to report this and other corrections to them, at least test the response, perhaps to establish credibility for some future inquiries. Do you have any advice, from specific or general experience? --P64 (talk) 17:20, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OEB 6th edition has Irene (Dimmie) Fleming but no A I Fleming or Mrs A. Leslie references. The Bridge Players' Encyclopedia of 1965 has her as Mrs. A. Leslie (Dimmie) Fleming as does OEB 1st edition so somewhere between its edition 1 and 6 the name change occurs.

Cut and paste from WBF/EBL shows not "A.I." (uppercase i that I misread) but "A.l." (lowercase L), which clearly supports the confusion of wife and husband. He may actually be in their database correctly on grounds other than international play.

To investigate further, I have simply clicked on the link at the bottom of the WBF Bridge People web page which causes my email program (Outlooks) to pop up with the addressee filled out to "people@worldbridge.org". I can imagine that any major organization like WBF would not simply add information about a player on the basis of an email from someone they do not know. They must have to verify everything before posting any changes ...

Not always. Their own so-called comprehensive biography of Dimmie Fleming (linked above) makes this one clear and some person or imperson such as user 'people' may recognize it as a data integrity error, perhaps generated internally.

... and who knows how long that takes or if they even bother. As an aside and in a similar vein, I have always been dissapointed by how poorly written are some of the ACBL Hall of Fame biographies of the HoF members; it seems that many organnizations are not very good at managing their image on the internet. The first question to ask the WBF should be "What is the process for adding to or correcting their information? As I alluded to, I have sent the WBF 3 or 4 emails asking simple questions and have never gotten a reply or aknowledgement but I will keep trying. Perhaps a better strategy is to get an actual email of an actual person somehow and get them to deal with any requests. It is my expectation that people are much more responsible when acting in their own name as opposed to some corporate general mailbox name but I am not sure how you would get a live person contact. Newwhist (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We may see improvement, such as get one personal eddress in return, when I submit a data integrity error, or three. Or when you try another inquiry, perhaps try in a different way.

PS. I also noticed that if you look at the bottom of the WBF Rixi Markus profile page there is a section labelled "Variations" and when you click on it you get her maiden name and one event record so it is clear that the WBF does at least track name changes to some degree. Sally Brock would be a good test of how well that is done. I will check this and report back later. Newwhist (talk) 18:40, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
PPS. Searching for BROCK gets you to a list of BROCKs including Sally Brock on the WBF people site. I see that they do capture all her names under Sally Brock (Sowter, Horton and Brock) but that her country affiliation and identification number changes from Great Britain to England after the 1993 entries. If you start the search with SOWTER or HORTON there are no 'hits' given for Sally Brock, so it is obvious you have to know the name being used in the records which I surmise is the most current surname on which everything is based. When you look at any particular entry, it is clear that the name given when on a list of team members is the name which was in use at the time of the event - which makes sense to me as the correct way to do it. Newwhist (talk) 18:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the structure of the Results & Participants database, you are mainly right [skip details]. On England what you say pertains to the linked tournament records (GBR Team; ENG Team) not to the people records ("A.l. Fleming / Great Britain"; "Irene (Demmie) Fleming / England").

I'll report this error and, later, more errors broadly of this nature. You keep trying in your way but please don't report this one (Fleming). --P64 (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to Dimmie Fleming, I always remember seeing her name given as "Mrs A.L. Fleming". The A and L were probably her husband's initials; it was usual back in the 1950s and earlier for wives to be referred to in that way. Even in the 1960s, I can recall Billie Jean King being listed on the Wimbledon order of play as "Mrs L.W. King". According to Mrs Fleming's obituary in the October, 1996 edition of English Bridge, the magazine for members of the EBU: "No-one today would recognise Dimmie by her given name of Phyllis Irene." So her own initials were actually P.I. The same article (reprinted in the British Bridge Almanack reveals that her surname prior to marriage was Hill. I suspect that the "A.I." was either the result of a typo, or from someone realising that her name was Irene and making what they thought was a correction.JH (talk page) 09:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Given all of the above I wonder what Wiki policy says about how an article on her should be titled?
Dimmie Fleming
Phyllis Irene (Dimmie) Fleming
A.L. Fleming
other variation
Within the WkiProject Contract bridge, we should adopt a practice of providing all known name variations in the article and make redirects for each to the name adopted for the article. That way anyone searching under any name variation will still get to the article. Newwhist (talk) 13:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about providing redirects for name variations that people are likely to try when looking for an article. I believe that Wikipedia policy is that the titling of the article itself should use the name by which the person was most commonly known, which in this case would definitely be "Dimmie Fleming". (That would also be consistent with what we have done for other people, such as Rixi Markus, "Rixi" actually being a diminutive form for her birth name of Erika.) Then within the body of the article, the boldened name at the start might read Phyllis Irene (Dimmie) Fleming. JH (talk page) 17:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I will draft a summary paragraph for the Manual of Style. Newwhist (talk) 14:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, 'Dimmie Fleming' is the best title and the lead sentence should begin "Phyllis Irene (Dimmie) Fleming ..." or "Phyllis Irene Fleming, or Dimmie Fleming ..."
WBF/EBL does not list her as A.I. in the 1950s but as A.L. (using a lowercase L, identical to uppercase I in many fonts including the one I display here).
By now I feel sure that the database name A.L. Fleming is derived from Mrs. A.L. Fleming (for Alfred Leslie). I suppose that different European cultures had and have different norms; anyway, American and British norms have varied and evolved during this time period (see [[[Mrs.]]). As I learned in northern US America, "Mrs. A.L. Fleming" and "Mrs. Alan Truscott" are correct, insofar as the women approve, and they imply husbands with given names A.L. and Alan, namely A.L. Fleming and Alan Truscott.
I now believe (with good evidence not given here) that many names in the WBF/EBL database are derived from "Mrs [Fname Lname]", or equivalent in another language, by dropping the "Mrs" or equivalent. That's simply wrong in the American usage I learned, where [Fname Lname] is the husband's name. (See Mrs.#Traditional usage, first paragraph; contrast with the fourth paragraph and Mrs.#Modern usage, first two paragraphs.) It may be correct elsewhere —anywhere [Fname Lname] is reliably the wife's name— but it isn't a generally reliable protocol and the database incorporates it unreliably.
Bottom line: I agree with Newwhist's observation that we at en.wikipedia WPCB need cooperation with other-language pedia (or directly with other-national bridge players/historians). That may be impractical but we should not take names too seriously in its absence.
P.S. Mrs. explains that 'Mrs' is correct outside North America and South Africa, so I won't continue to add the dot by default. --P64 (talk) 16:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contact at WBF[edit]

I received an email response today regarding my enquiry to the WBF. My enquiry was "Is Rixi Markus not a World Grand Master? If not, does she have another title?" The reply came back as follows:

"She died in 1992 at this time the WBF Masterpoints were not kept if the player died (yes I know, a silly idea). I am trying to rebuild this data but I having trouble getting hold of the information I need. The job is a big one.
All the best"
(name witheld)

I do not want to post the name of the contact in this public space until I know it is OK to do so and can do so in a more private way.

So it appears that this person at WBF is also interested in improving the information on the WBF website which is great if he is willing to collaborate with Wiki people - not everyone is keen on the Wiki concept and some regard it as an intrusion on their own 'space'. Newwhist (talk) 12:22, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Article Nominations[edit]

Cross reference: This hour I have posted more generally at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Notable people criteria#Names and aliases.

New Article Nominations is a subsection of Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge#Articles needing attention.

Should the nominations use recommended titles without redirects/pipes? For example, "Kathie Wei-Sender" iff we recommend that form of her name? Richard L. Frey iff we recommend the middle initial [I do]. Sam Fry, Jr. iff we recommend the suffix [I don't]. Along the same lines, should we list the first rather than the second of these two alternatives?

[I say yes.] --P64 (talk) 22:07, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Contract_bridge/Archive_2011&oldid=1100146307"