Talk:The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists

message: Is the book really non-fiction? any proof?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.33.71 (talk) 13:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Many many many people have came out and said the events in the book are true, not to mention the countless postings from before the books was published which back up the events in it (although having said that, the book does often bend the truth a little during a few parts of it). Mathmo Talk 08:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

text: There are many different verions/printings of "The Game", however the most common version (in shops and when portrayed in the Media, i.e. a shot of the book in the news etc...) seems to be of the black covered one. However other's such as my neighbour's is a small soft covered book with a full colour and cartoony kind of look to the cover. Mathmo 09:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Not so sure if done tongue in check, but it does appear to have only been a rumor going about , so is now removed. Thanks. Mathmo Talk 11:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: bible-like appearance

message: A while has passed, remove it now perhaps? Mathmo Talk 10:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, this article was a magnet for bad edits.  Leave it protected forever. Squidfryerchef 01:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protection 

message: Is it definitely the 18th Dec?? Because I have a copy sitting right here...
Nutcracker2007 (talk) 01:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release date of the "Rules of the Game" 

message: Will this image of the recently published book will do?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Game_Paperback.jpg
# Publisher: Canongate Books Ltd (28 Nov 2007)
# Language English
# ISBN-10: 184767237X
# ISBN-13: 978-1847672377
I've made some appropriate selections regarding copyright policies prior to the upload.
Shin-chan01 (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article already has an image. Is there a need for a second image? Hmm.. perhaps, could illustrate the many different versions that have been marketed. Mathmo Talk 00:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image nomination 

message: A little worried about how the article has developed, laying out the plot outline as apparently the "gospel truth" of what happened (as this is labeled as a non-fiction book) is the wrong way to go about this. I believe the best way to balance this article out and move it towards being more NPOV would be to add another section with the differencing views of what went on. And on a unrelated point, here is a few photos from that time period:  Mathmo Talk 08:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-fiction & plot outline 

message: Its a case of reality. Ive been on these dating sites and a lot of what Neil writes is true but I must admnit I have  never encountered guys who actually correspond with each other. Usualy when that happens people get suspicious. 84.9.61.204 (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reality? 

message: (Note - the below was originally placed on my personal talk page, but since all the comments pertain to this particular article, I thought it would be more appropriate to place it here. Rray (talk) 07:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The phrase "a slew" is vague and unencyclopedic and probably shouldn't be used, but I don't care enough about the article to bicker about it. "I like it" is not a valid reason to use a phrase though. I see your point about the term "exposes" although I don't necessarily agree with it. Regarding doing the research, if you've included an appropriate citation (which is the responsibility of the editor adding the information to the article), I won't have to do any research other than clicking on the footnote. Rray (talk) 07:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I included tags requesting citations for some of the claims that you re-added, and I deleted the phrase "a slew of" again, as it doesn't *add* any meaning, but it's pretty clearly a vague and promotional phrase. Based on your detailed comments above, I'm assuming that you're familiar enough with the subject to add appropriate citations. Rray (talk) 08:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Game 

message: Don't we think this is unintentionally hilarious: "when his girlfriend cheats on him with one of his best friends, he sinks into a bout of depression". This is a guy, remember, whose entire reason for existence has been improving techniques for picking up women. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: no, it is not his "entire reason for existence". He primarily is a writer. Mathmo Talk 05:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the statment is about Mystery, who makes a living teaching men how to pick up girls. And then he is upset because his girlfriend cheats on him. Either way it's still funny. And tragic, of course. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Yes, Mystery was often cited as somebody who can't get in a serious relationship if his life depended on it, but one who can attract and seduce almost any women he lays his eyes on.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.170.123 (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This is funny

message: #"follow suit" means to do as the other person does. "Complies" means to do what you are told.
#to "level accusation" is generally done speaking to the person who has done the wrong
#"incorporated into himself" is just new-age mumbo jumbo and we shouldn't use it, unless it's a quote when it should be in quote marks.
DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Some wrong words

message: This link does not appear to meet our guidelines.  External links aren't for links that are related (we're not a portal or directory of links) it's for links that provide further encyclopedic about the subject of the article - in this case the book The Game.   There doesn't seem to be any real information on the stylelife.com page that is about this book.  -- SiobhanHansa 01:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If no one objects in the next day or so I will remove the link again.  -- SiobhanHansa 11:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suppose it would be appropriate on the author's page rather than the book Mathmo Talk 06:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That would make more sense to me if the site contains much information about the author - or if the WP article on Strauss talks significantly about the website. -- SiobhanHansa 12:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  stylelife.com link 

message: Does anyone think it might be a good idea to have a "Critical Reception" section for this article? I have been looking for reviews but so far have not come up with any. Paulish (talk) 05:30, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Critical Reception" section?

message: I'm wondering if anyone's seen the literature categorized as such or if anyone agrees with me that it may potentially be considered Gonzo journalism. Strauss was clearly a major part of the PUA community during what can be described as research for the book, but he claims that he didn't join the community with the intention of writing about it. Thanks for any clarifications Aznph8playa2 (talk) 19:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Categorizable as Gonzo Journalism?

message: I have Finnish translation of that book (“Pelimies. Alaston totuus pokaajien veljeskunnasta” Literally: “The Gameman. The Naked Truth about Brotherhood of Pick-up Artists.”). In its first pages name of that original book is like this: The game. Undercover in the Secret Society of Pickup Artists.
juhtolv (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Other sub-titles of that book

message: Added a reception section, with three reviews from WP:RS.Autarch (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception 

message: I propose that Owen Cook be merged into The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists, with his name serving as a redirect. While Cook has gotten attention, it's all been within the scope of this book and he hasn't received any attention beyond that point. Other than a few articles that discuss him within the scope of The Game, the rest of the sources can't be used to back up any notability. If no one has any arguments against this, I'd like to see if anything is mergable and most importantly- to redirect Cook's article to this one. I'm looking and I don't really see much to merge that isn't already here, but I wanted to post this here just in case. Since I posted this today (5/25/12), if nobody minds then I'm going to redirect Cook's article here on 7/1/12. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I merged the content. --Enric Naval (talk) 10:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

text: *This is pretty much the only thing he's really known for on Wikipedia and considering that the only other option would've been to delete the page due to a lack of depth of coverage, this seemed to be a good compromise. Mystery's far more well known than Durden is, yet his page still got deleted. (I redirected his name to the TV show he hosted.) Durden does not have the notability needed for his own article and his company Real Social Dynamics has been repeatedly deleted for the same reasons. Since you're contesting the merger, I'm taking it to AfD where there will be a larger audience to debate the merits of the article, whether it should be kept, and whether it should be a redirect to this book.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

text: I agree with Chantoke. Tyler has a secundary role, while Mystery and Style are the main characters. --AeroPsico (talk) 14:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: Is this image of people in the book or not? If not, perhaps it should be removed as irrelevant as the topic of the article is the book. Autarch (talk) 21:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image of people on street