Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Manual of Style

message: I prefer "notrump" rather than "no trump".  To me, "notrump" is more concise; "no trump" is distracting in a bridge context.  We are eliding the space in bids and cards (specifying "2" rather than "2 "; strictly speaking the latter better represents "two hearts"), so why not use notrump as well? The article does not say it, but I think we want to use NT (e.g., "2NT", without a space) in bidding. Ray Spalding 00:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I started this as a proposal, i.e. a soapbox where we seek consensus; of course, some of those are my personal preferences (and I do occasionally take the liberty to act according to them), and shouldn't be taken as a law until more thoroughly discussed. You're certainly welcome to edit the page. In general, we should use Pavlicek's and BW guidelines with slight modifications. As for "notrump" vs. "no trump", I must say that I personally often use the former, as it's less clumsy on occasions. I think I was persuaded by a talk page of some article (can't find it right now), however, e.g. we used them interchangeably at Talk:Contract bridge and we have Forcing notrump article. I'll scratch the entry, as undecided at best.Duja 09:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also prefer "notrump" and agree we should use "NT" in bidding. Matchups 02:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "notrump" and continue moving in that direction (eg, "cuebid"). --P64 (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: * Also prefer "notrump" and that we should use "NT" in bidding. Given the lapse in time and the foregoing concensus, I have edited the project page accordingly. Newwhist (talk) 23:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

text: * Subequent review of style manuals (see Pavlicek Article 7Z69 confirm that 'notrump" is preferred over "no trump" Newwhist (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  no trump or notrump 

message: I'm going to remove the portions of this section which discuss article naming.  I've started a separate page on this topic at /naming conventions, as suggested by the main page. Matchups 02:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  article formatting 

message: ::Re level and strain symbols:
::* Use one from each set to specify one of 35 bids or contracts or to restrict strain (3m).
::* What about 3, 3m, and 3NT in prose? How much to use them and preceded by which determiners? (the 3 bid [about a particular auction]; a/the 3 response to opening 1NT; a/either/both 3M reply to Stayman; every 3NT bid) --P64 (talk) 18:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: specific bids or contracts

message: or narration — there may be too many section headings in this Manual
These sentences or verb phrases are clear.
* follow with the king of spades (or follow with the K; not "follow with K" per above) 
* lead the king; underlead the king
So are these.
* win with the king; duck with the king; finesse with the king
But these may not be clear. Do they now have unequivocal meanings in bridge english?
* win the king; duck the king; finesse the king
--P64 (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No one has yet replied so I have taken the liberty of revising my one-year old contribution. --P64 (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  description of play 

message: I wonder whether this  8-column table is easier to follow than the 5-column table Pavlicek recommends. --P64 (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that your 8-column table is easier to follow but only if you are already familiar with the 4-column style.  If you are not, it may be very problematic.  Is there some way to add keys to the 4-column table which visually tells the reader who won each trick and what the lead to each trick is, such as color coding, bolding, italicising?  Will contemplate and put some options on your sandbox page.  Newwhist (talk) 18:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Play by play table 

message: Should there be recommended boilerplate wording and links such as "In the card game contract bridge ..."? --P64 (talk) 00:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead phrase 

message: Are articles on bridge people covered elsewhere? 
Probably there should be some recommended features, even recommended layouts, in a big class of articles on bridge players. One is the list of important playing achievements, which many biogs do have, laid out a few years ago. --P64 (talk) 00:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  People 

message: This article and its children, the Manual of Style broadly, will benefit from consistent use of italics, single, and double quotation marks. I think it's clear we should being with italics. When should they be used for a term in contrast to a title? --P64 (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manual of Style style