Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Go

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Go (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Go, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the game of Go 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the quality scale.
 

Irish Go Association - deletion proposed[edit]

No mention was made on the project page :( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Irish_Go_Association#Irish_Go_Association --ZincBelief (talk) 22:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Portal: Strategy games: Chess but not Go - Grrr![edit]

Hiya. There exists a {{Portal box|Strategy games}} , which I guess one can add into the "== See also ==" section of Go articles. (Use a {{clear}} after it, for neater inter-section breaks.)

But, how come there's not a [[Portal:Go]] , even though there's a Portal:Chess,

and the latter enjoys great prominence on the Portal:Strategy games page ?! Trafford09 (talk) 14:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Most of the people interested in editing Go articles have become disinterested. I find editing wikipedia pretty tedious these days. I remember Charles Matthews suggested a Go Portal years ago, but nothing came of it.--ZincBelief (talk) 12:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Go should definitely be included somewhere in the strategy portal, especially since the main game article is pretty good these days. Steven Walling 16:07, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the above overview, ZB & Steven. It's a task I think I fancy, starting in early September. I know there's another Go player PetitBouda (talk) who's been pretty active lately, & I can help him with English, with it not being his native tongue. Please keep an eye out for any developments, & help put right any mistakes we make, if you'd be so kind.

In fact, are there any pitfalls you're aware of, that I too should be? Obviously, I'll read up all about Portals before doing anything concrete. Should I pitch [[Portal:Go]] right up at the same level as Portal:Chess?

I know it's less common in the West, but only because people haven't had the joy of playing it, in my experience of (cough, many) years of playing Go.

Any thoughts, fears & ideas thrown here into the pot would be very welcome. I'll ask Charles Matthews for ideas too. I know he still edits on WP. Thanks again, Trafford09 (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Creating Portal:Go seems a perfectly reasonable idea. There will probably be points arising as soon as there is some definite content. But that is probably a good thing; general points about articles linked to from the portal can be brought here, while detailed discussion of exactly what the portal should contain should probably remain on its talk page. Thanks for raising the idea. Charles Matthews (talk) 09:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's just as well that wp:There is no deadline, as I've been sidetracked, so won't be able to look further at this until say mid-October. BTW, I came across this list of all the most recent edits to Go articles, which I found interesting. It's accessible to all from here. Trafford09 (talk) 04:10, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Go articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release[edit]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Go articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:05, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Good Morning WikiProject[edit]

Hi, Is anyone interested in making a push from taking Go from B class status to GA status? The article has a review a while ago, failed on a few small points, and has undergone some work since to address the issues raised. I've noticed a complete lack of interest recently to do anything of substance.--ZincBelief (talk) 13:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. A highly-commendable goal, and good luck with your efforts (& hopefully others'). I'd like to help, but am behind in my own targets (see above). Trafford09 (talk) 11:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of the IGS Go server article[edit]

The following tag has been placed on IGS Go server: {{Proposed deletion/dated|concern = Non-notable web service - all refs are primary; no indication of significance.|timestamp = 20101014125104}}

The tag goes on to say that:

  • "If you can address this concern by improving, copy-editing, sourcing, renaming or merging the page, please edit this page and do so. You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason. However please explain why you object to the deletion, either in your edit summary or on the talk page. If this template is removed, it should not be replaced.
  • The article may be deleted if this message remains in place for seven days, i.e. after 12:51 on 21 October.".

We could help preserve this article, by expanding it, seeking further references to IGS or Pandanet.

This can be achieved by clicking on the following searches:

Thank you, Trafford09 (talk) 12:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Not that deletionist-cod-clown again--ZincBelief (talk) 13:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Ko Reibun at AFD[edit]

An article on Go player Ko Reibun has been listed at articles for deletion -- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ko Reibun. Informed opinions about this person would be appreciated. -- Whpq (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

There is a reliable source at Gobase: http://gobase.org/information/players/?pp=Ko%20Reibun . The Gobase site should be counted as a reliable source for biographical purposes. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Also a mention on http://www.gogod.co.uk/NewInGo/Overseas_1.htm (NB also called Kong Lingwen). The GoGod site by John Fairbairn is to be considered authoritative. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Here's his official page at the Nihon Kiin: http://www.nihonkiin.or.jp/player/htm/ki000360.htm . It does show he studied under Kikuchi. There are enough sources on this player. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I suggest you provide this information at the AFD discussion. -- Whpq (talk) 20:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Ko Iso at AFD[edit]

Ko Iso, a Go player, has been nominated for deletion based on a lack of reliable sources for a biography of a living person, and issues with notability. Informed opinions at the discussion would be welcome. -- Whpq (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Mingjiu Jiang Can you help?[edit]

I've tried, and failed to source this long-term unreferenced BLP for Go player Mingjiu Jiang using the info on your Project page (which was extremely useful for several other long-term UBLPs - thank you!). I'm posting here in the hope that someone with better knowledge of the area would like to take an interest and locate at least one reliable source. If it stays unreferenced for much longer, it is likely to be nominated for AfD. --Plad2 (talk) 18:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Plad2. Many thanks for your sourcing efforts in general, and esp. re go-players (plus your kind words). We're also grateful for your alerting us re this player.
I've contacted another more-experienced editor who knows more sources in general, so I'll see if he comes up trumps (I'm hopeful) &, if so, I intend to document his new method, with those already documented. Thanks again, Trafford09 (talk) 22:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Over the next three to six months, it is likely that the entire UBLP backlog will be cleared out. For articles which are easily google-searched, they'll be done without incident. However, non-English names or more obscure people are likely to end up as PROD or AFD candidates if the first google search is blank or just wiki-mirrors. Your projects full list is only 42 people long as of today, and will probably be under 20 tomorrow -see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Go/Unreferenced_BLPs. It would be greatly appreciated if your project could attempt to reference them all, to prevent any lazy searches from deleting possibly notable players. Of course, this is also a time for your project to ensure that all of the players listed are suitable for articles and delete truly non-notable players as required. Regards, The-Pope (talk) 16:07, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Plad2: this player (& some others) now often play outside Asia. The American_Go_Association has info. on such players. I've added a new section - Wikipedia:WikiProject_Go#American_Go_Association - to show how one can get URLs (in this case 212!) for such a player. Trafford09 (talk) 18:42, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

A who's-doing-what section or subpage[edit]

Hi! I think it could be very useful for us to have a section or subpage about which project members are working on what things. That way, people could tell at a glance what's being worked on and what isn't. If people wanted to work on a specific thing, they could see who else is working on the same thing and collaborate with them. What do you guys think? --Tanner Swett (talk) 17:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Biographies and people in categories[edit]

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games#Biographies and people in categories

I am hoping to build guidelines for notability criteria for what makes someone notable in the games field i.e. Wikipedia:Notability_(sports)#Curling. Especially games players that I feel needs to have a section similar to the sports and athletes. An example of a question that has just arisen is does winning the first scrabble world championship count as just WP:Oneevent. Combined contribution issues also need defining.

The other conversation is do we want to have category inclusion criteria does a certain threshold need to be met before we add someone to Category:Chess players. Should Ben Afleck count as a poker player?Tetron76 (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Shusaku Number[edit]

Hi all. Just in case - like me - you didn't spot the following deletion. Until today, there existed an article Shusaku number. It was deleted as described here:

"This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.
02:08, 17 May 2011 Athaenara (Talk | contribs) deleted "Shusaku number" ‎
(WP:PROD: Nominated for seven days with no objection: reason was "non-notable, no sources".
More at User talk:Aditsu.)".

Is there any view as to whether the article merits a case for reinstatement? Trafford09 (talk) 07:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I've put in a request for undeletion. I think it's a concept worth mentioning on Wikipedia. However, the old page (still visible through Google's cache) would need some serious work: just compare it with Erdős number for example. For a start, it would be good to find a second source for the article (does it get a mention in an issue of Go World or Go Review magazine somewhere?) Jowa fan (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
It's kind of very marginal for the encyclopedia, though. A PROD deletion means it can be brought back at any time. I doubt that there are serious references, but of course there might be. Charles Matthews (talk) 11:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay, finding another good source is less easy than I thought. I searched through Go World Archive and GoGoD and didn't come up with anything. There is a mention at Small world experiment, but that itself doesn't seem completely reliable. And there's this intriguing book. On the other hand, the idea of "Shusaku number" shouldn't be any less notable than Morphy number. Jowa fan (talk) 13:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I could ask John Fairbairn, I suppose, what sort of network concepts the Japanese actually might use. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion[edit]

Update: The article has been reinstated - but only temporarily. Views pro- or anti-deletion can now be posted at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shusaku_number. Trafford09 (talk) 13:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Notability tag on Sensei's Library[edit]

A tag has been placed on Sensei's Library (SL), by an editor who considers that it 'may not meet the general notability guideline', meaning that the article may in the worst case scenario be deleted.

I realise that SL is large & important across the Go continents, and is referenced from 21 other WP articles.

Hence, to me it seems very notable.

I note that SL's notability has been questioned & discussed in previous years & survived.

What are other editors' opinions, please? Trafford09 (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

SL is a good wiki, though in my opinion it would be better if, over the years, it had learned more from WP about how to write reference material. The point here, really, is to what extent it gets recognition from go associations, or in the literature. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:27, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I see the person who nominated this for deletion was banned from wikipedia. Snarf Snarf. ZincBelief (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Capitalization[edit]

After posting at Talk:Go (game), I am posting here as well, with the hope of receiving broader input. "Go" seems to be capitalized in related articles, and I am wondering if this is correct. Readers have opined that it is traditionally capitalized; I am asking, "Why?". I have no desire to follow the letter of the MoS if there is a better solution. However, I have yet to see a concrete reason for capitalizing. Joefromrandb (talk) 22:57, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The biggest source of good go writing in English is Go World magazine and all the books translated and published by Ishi Press and Kiseido. They consistently use lower-case. That's where I learned to read and write about go, and I still find the upper-case jarring when I run across it. Of course you can argue that that's just one house style. Eleuther (talk) 04:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
In favor of upper-case, at least two modern writers of non-Ishi Press go books in English use it (Janice Kim and Charles Matthews). The first go book in English, by Arthur Smith (1908), also used it, but he capitalized everything, including Chess, and the names of the Chess Pieces, and all go terms such as sente and ko and black and white and so on, maybe because he was largely translating from the German author Korschelt. In opposition, the American Heritage Dictionary gives it as lower-case, as well as the few other dictionaries I've managed to consult so far. Other game names like chess and checkers are not usually capitalized in WP or elsewhere, i.e., are not treated as proper nouns. Other words imported into English from Japanese are likewise not usually capitalized, like sushi and tsunami. (Zen, it seems can go both ways, depending on whether you think it's a proper noun, like Methodism.)
The issue seems to turn partly on how you feel about the idea that grammar and orthography are things that can be re-invented as you go along, "for the convenience of the reader," or for other reasons such as ideology or trying to make them more "logical." I personally feel that traditional grammar should be conserved as far as possible, to facilitate communication across cultures and decades. But this is not necessarily a majority position any more, given, for example, the hash that's been made out the the usage of gender-specific pronouns. So, on this minor issue within the overall confusion, my opinion is that we should stick to the traditional rule that improper nouns go uncapitalized, but I'm not going to edit-war with anyone about it. If you want to make a case that we should treat go differently from all other game names, and all other imported Japanese words, let's hear it. Eleuther (talk) 13:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Grammar is a set of arbitrary rules, there is no sense of tradition about them. most people prefer it to be capitalised as has been seen in previous discussions, so why change it?ZincBelief (talk) 13:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't think "most people prefer it to be capitalised" is borne out by the discussion either here or at Talk:Go (game). Has it been discussed anywhere else on Wikipedia? Personally I'm against capitalisation because I think go should be treated the same way as chess and other board games. Jowa fan (talk) 13:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Have you bothered to look at the previous discussions on the issue which all resulted in the consensus to keep GoZincBelief (talk) 15:09, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Can you give us a clue where these discussions are located? Thanks! Eleuther (talk) 15:16, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
No, look for it yourself, I have better things to do. Thanks!ZincBelief (talk) 15:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Apparently, "being polite" isn't one of them. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:47, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Do you regard being lazy as polite? ZincBelief (talk) 09:59, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Okay, well, thanks anyway. The discussions I've found didn't seem to show consensus. Eleuther (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
I prefer Go capitalised, but I thank Joe for his valid question, and Eleuther for his polite, researched and even-handed opinions. I don't think it's an issue to get upset about, whichever way consensus is perceived to evolve.
I prefer Go for various reasons.
#1: I'm used to it (I play and read a lot). I'm also a regular proofreader for the British Go Journal (BGJ), a quarterly 44-page publication of the British Go Association (BGA). The BGJ's editorial stance is always to capitalise Go. It's on its 157th journal as we speak.
#2: The main Go Associations on both sides of the great pond - AGA and BGA - generally both use it capitalised. Please see this US example and this UK one.
(The cited US example actually uses the lower-case version more prominently. Eleuther (talk) 13:58, 29 October 2011 (UTC))
#3: The BBC copies the US+UK style in this example.
#4: In a shortish article, with the reader perhaps unfamiliar with the game, it's easier to read. (Yes, I know in some Go books it's not capitalised, but in a book of over 300 pages, say, Go would be unnecessary [and tedious].)
#5: WP's status quo has it as Go, and there are so many articles we'd need to carefully change if we are to be consistent - a job I wouldn't fancy anyway. There are 55 pages in the main [[Category:Go (game)]]. Under that, just one of its 13 sub-categories - [[Category:Go players]] - has several hundred linked articles alone.
Trafford09 (talk) 16:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
To muddy the water a bit more, I've noticed that writers about mathematical game theory tend to capitalize all game names, thus Go, Chess, Poker, Nim, and so on, i.e., they think of games as things that have proper names. Eleuther (talk) 03:37, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Am not a member here but am impressed w/ Eleuther's points, he seems very knowledgable. IMO the game name shouldn't be capitalized for consistency with other games not trademarked and having no specific known inventor, primarily chess, checkers, international draughts, shogi, xianqi, and backgammon, but also janggi, makruk, sittuyin, shatranj, chaturanga, dominoes, cribbage, crossword, and so on. (It seems strong that go s/ fall into these groups for consistency's sake, and consistency s/b a big deal regarding a respected encyclopedia!) Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 05:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────This is an old thread, but I still hope somebody's watching it. I am interested in this because I am currently working on some articles about shogi. "Shogi" is also a foreign word and is also a board game. "Shogi" is capitalized when it is part of a proper name, e.g., the Japan Shogi Association, or used to begin a sentence, but otherwise it is typically not, e.g., "I play shogi." So, I am trying to understand how it is different from "go". Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Merging yose into Go terms[edit]

I'm thinking yose should be merged into Go terms. I don't think there is enough to be said about it to merit an entire article and that it is appropriate in the Go terms article. While I'm at it I could cleanup the several redirects as well. There are only 12 articles linking to it and 2 of them are redirects. If I don't get a response on this for a few days I will go ahead and do it without one.

You should go ahead and do it I think. It's not a very well-referenced stub, and can probably be edited down into a section of Go terms. Steven Walling • talk 06:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Done. PatheticCopyEditor (talk) 06:30, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


Capitalization of white and black[edit]

There is an ongoing discussion on the Go (game) talk page and I'd like to solicit input from editors of Wikiproject Go. The discussion regards the proper capitalization of White and Black in the article on Go. Coastside (talk) 16:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Threshold for professionals' notability[edit]

Background[edit]

There is a section on the Project page concerning how strong a professional player should be, to merit inclusion in Wikipedia. It contains what is thought to be the current consensus opinion.

However, opinions are divided on whether to leave the recommended threshold as is shown there, or to change it to reflect some new consensus. Discussions are obviously healthy - and welcomed - on this and any other WP issue.

Please feel free to add your views to those expressed below. (I've taken the liberty of moving them to here, from the project page itself, to leave the latter easier to use.)

If and when people feel that consensus has been reached on changing our threshold, do please advise so here, so that after any last-minute discussions, people may agree that consensus has been reached, then we can safely change the threshold accordingly.

Thanks, Trafford09 (talk) 15:58, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Users' views[edit]

I think that this [the 4P threshold & comments thereon on the project page] can only be said to be true for Japanese professionals, where (prior to 200'N') their were 3 tiers of professional status. Given the new system in place at the Nihon Ki-in does this still hold true? The system used at the Kansai Kiin is a mystery to me. For China, Taiwan and South Korea there are different systems. Also, I have no knowledge that Charles is an expert on Chess...--ZincBelief (talk) 16:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm not a chess expert, but have a working knowledge of the game. Kansai Ki-in grades are probably (now) less reputable, and mainly in the lower tiers used to accredit teachers. In each system there is going to be a barrier corresponding to a "career choice": it would be less common, I think, for a pro 4 dan in Japan to take up something else. But that is partly cultural.
One should note, however - and it is a big "however" - that the reduction of "notability" to "enough verifiable information" works in favour of lower-ranked pros being counted as notable in WP's sense. I have never quite bought into that argument; but the fact is that yearbooks in Japan and South Korea carry good-quality biographical information even for quite low-ranked pros. The population of pro go players in the world is under 1000 living, a few times that if you include dead players too. Judging by what is done for cricket, we could easily argue that every player who has played in a Kisei Tournament (or others out of the same box), or any international all-pro tournament, should be included here. The fact that the Wisden equivalents are in oriental languages is not an argument against at all - rather the opposite.
Anyway, it would be good to have a consensus version of this discussion as a project page, rather than a thread. That is the customary procedure. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:53, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
From Talk:Tatsuaki Iwata. I don't really see the need for a specific notability guideline for Go professionals, and I'd like to be pointed to the one about chess grandmasters, which I could not find. Then, even if it exists, the parallel should be drawn at the maximum level, so that a grandmaster pairs with a Go 9p. --M4gnum0n (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Hm, if we were to implement this 4 dan benchmark, then someone like Tuo Jiaxi would be deemed not notable enough for Wikipedia because of his 3 dan rank, despite winning a major title (Chang-ki Cup in 2010) and winning four times in a row in the 10th Nongshim Cup. He was also first in most wins last year with 56. Manfred Wimmer would also be not notable enough despite being the first Western professional.
I believe that any go player, if they have reached professional strength, should be notable enough if not only for being a professional in their field. I also believe the Go players article needs a massive overhaul to give readers, new and old, a clearer picture of professional go. Just my two cents.
P.S. I know this is a bit off-topic, but why are the Japanese names reversed? I can't think of anywhere that refers to the players in the way WP does. I find it largely confusing and annoying to say "Rin Kono" when everywhere else says "Kono Rin". Leesed0l (talk) 06:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I think it's reasonable to say that if someone is professional 4 dan then they should be considered notable. This should not imply that everyone below 4 dan fails notability: they may be notable for other reasons. I've edited the first paragraph of this section: 4 dan certainly gives a quick criterion, but there's doubt as to whether it's completely accurate. (Regarding the name order: I don't like it, but it's standard policy on Wikipedia: for Japanese people born in 1868 or later the family name comes last (but the family name comes first in Chinese and in Korean).) Jowa fan (talk) 12:13, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. I guess I may have misconstrued the original guideline a bit. If I may trouble you a bit more, could you please look at the discussion at Talk:Go players? I've made the suggestion that only players who have won a major title in their respective countries or an international title should be included in the list, with the rest staying in the categories. Otherwise, the page becomes a replica of information that could be found in their appropriate categories. Thanks! Leesed0l (talk) 17:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

"Honorary" vs. "Lifetime"[edit]

Hi,

I understand why the word "honorary" is being used on Honorary Go Titles and although it is indeed one way to translate the Japanese word 名誉 into English, I don't know believe it is being correctly used in this context. I believe in is much more appropriate to use the word "Lifetime" instead.

While it is true that honorary title may be awarded to go professional in recognition of their over the board play, such titles are also commonly awarded to famous people (politicians, entertainers, etc.) for contributions they have made to the promotion of Go. In some cases, such a person may be a relatively strong amateur Go player, but most of the time such titles are just in recognition of who they are and not of any actual results in over the board play. This kind of thing is not exclusive to Go, but also occurs in Shogi as well. In the West, honorary degrees and other honorary academic titles are not typically awarded due to academic achievement, rather in most cases it is simply done because who the person is, how much money they have donated or a combination of both.

On the other, I think that "Lifetime" in this context is a much better way to describe recognition for excellence in over the board play. In Chess, "lifetime titles" are often given to players who have demonstrated their ability to perform at a high for a certain period of time or number of games. For example, the United States Chess Federation awards the title of "Lifetime Master" to those players who have played 300 games at a rating of 2200 or higher. FIDE awards its "lifetime titles" (FM, IM, GM) to players who achieve certain norms and perform at a certain level. The word "honorary", at least in the West, seems to apply a title granted for ceremonial reasons only while "lifetime" seems to imply a title being that is more likely granted for "actual performance in one's given occupation." Of course this is not always the case, but I think it does apply in this context.

I am a feeling that the creator of this page was not a native English speaker and, therefore, was unable to make this distinction. Speaking from personal experience, I have found that many Japanese have difficulties understanding subtleties such as this. Over the years I have seen many examples of this, where the English being used is grammatically correct, but the context it is being used in is not. Many government, educational, and corporate websites/publications are use English that is not very natural sounding or out of context, but correct according to a Japanese-English dictionary. I think this a perfect example of such a case. Marchjuly (talk) 08:25, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honinbo_Shusaku[edit]

Hi,

there seems to be some vandalism going on on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honinbo_Shusaku due to todays google doodle. A lot of Text was deleted, and some sentences have words removed and now don't make sense grammatically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:5F:2C05:703A:9DE8:4A28:EEDB:567 (talk) 07:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Increase in IQ, Go (game)[edit]

"At the moment this section is dubious at best. Its gives two sources, a user discussion at sensei library and, a blog post at rail spikes. the first sections says. "Studies show" while in the source that is given no studies are shown. With one link to a study about internet addiction and how go maybe could prevent that from happening. The second statement comes from a programmer and is a guess nothing substantial but anecdotes are offered, which all once again lead to further speculation that does not seem relevant. While it would be lovely that the wonderful game of Go would increase our IQ. There would need to be at least some WP:RS in a relevant field making that claim, to add it to the article. So I suggest for now at least that this section is removed. Or at least to remove the first sentence if consensus is that the speculation of the programmer should remain. NathanWubs (talk) 16:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)" Coppied from Go (Game). Thought maybe it would be handier to put it here. NathanWubs (talk) 05:17, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention[edit]

This is a notice about Category:Go articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 20:22, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Please merge two wikidata (interlingual links)[edit]

Please merge Q22128033 and Q5453259 (articles on the first round-robin for OLD Meijin Tournament). It's beyond my wikiskills.61.210.125.27 (talk) 05:46, 18 April 2018 (UTC)