Talk:Glossary of contract bridge terms

message: :Search the archive page for '201' to find recent replies above.
In fact there are three hits for '201' in Archive 1, all of which represent calendar year 2011. There is no hit for any date '2000' to '2004' or '2008' to 2010'. The page history shows no substantial revisions between 19:19, 6 April 2007‎ and 03:51, 26 January 2011‎.
Thus Archive 1 in substance evidently covers 2005 to 2007 with three 2011 interjections. --P64 (talk) 20:23, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  (This marks a four-year break in discussion) 

message: The revised entry limits treatments to bids, a subset of calls. It limits conventions in the same way, but the entry Conventions is more general.
ACBL "Alert" regulations" seem to include a useful definition for Convention and a useless one for Treatment. --P64 (talk) 23:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Treatment 

message: I have removed the entry for "conventional call" for several reasons. The most cogent one is that the entry was a comment on diction rather than the definition of a technical term. Less important but still cogent is that the author appears to have ignored the pertinent definition of the word "convention," which is "an agreement or pact," per the Random House Unabridged. Granted, that's the fifth definition, but it's the one meant by its usage in contract bridge. Finally, a convention is not of itself necessarily nonstandard, unusual or special. The takeout double is a convention.  TurnerHodges (talk) 15:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "conventional call" 

message: Folks, A robot has corrected some section wikilinks, most recently in this revision. A few corrections are to lowercase capitalized anchor names. 
: [[#Shortclub => [[#shortclub
Several are not that, but I cannot discern them in the report. (I see no difference between the highlighted selections. Do you?) So I don't know whether they do indicate a true problem in our practices here. --P64 (talk) 14:36, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I too have tried to discern what is going on with some of these elusive changes and the best I have ever been able to come up with is (a) an obscure  change in punctuation (adding a comma, deleting a comma, replacing a comma with something else, etc.) and (b) reduction of two consecutive spaces to one. I have given up trying to figure these out on the premise that if the bot was doing something really stupid, better people than I can deal with it - too much else to do.  BTW your stamina on updating competitions is outstanding - atta boy (or girl)! Newwhist (talk) 19:40, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section wikilinks problem? 

message: I would have placed this on your own page but you have apparently not registered on Wikipedia.
Your enthusiasm for, and energy expended on, the edits you have been making to the contract bridge glossary are appreciated. However, there are frequent problems with the writing style you employ, as well as the completeness of the information. For example:
You have supplied a definition titled "0-4, or Blackwood," defining it as "A way to express a player is using plain Blackwood anwers to a Gerber or Blackwood ace asking bid." I believe that you mean to say that there is a term, "0-4," that one might use in response to the question "What responses to Blackwood are you and your partner using?" However, I can find no source to confirm that this is any sort of standard term. The matter of "standard" or traditional responses to the Blackwood convention is covered in its own article.
You state that 1430 is the "amount of points won in a major suit slam made." You omit the information that it is the score for a small slam, and that the slam must be bid as well as made. (That bit of information is marginally relevant, but just barely so, to a glossary definition of the term "1430.") Similarly, the CRASH entry is incomplete without mentioning its inherent ambiguity, which leads to pass-or-correct situations, that the type of suits is indicated by steps, and that many CRASH users also employ it over a 1NT opening bid. All of this is relevant to a definition of CRASH, and yet it is too much information for a glossary entry -- which is the reason that we decided to skip it in the first place.
You insert a glossary entry for "Chinese finesse." Years ago, when this glossary was in its initial construction, Duja and I (using a different handle) briefly discussed the propriety of employing that term in the glossary. We decided that it is inappropriate to do so.  Today's sensibilities regarding ethnic attributions are more enlightened than they were in the middle 1900s, when the term was more popular. The play is more properly termed a "pseudo finesse" and is discussed in the separate article on finesses; furthermore, the fact that the play is also termed a "Chinese" finesse is noted there. But there is no good and compelling reason to include it as such in the glossary.
The tone of the entries is inappropriate for a glossary in an encyclopedia. Phrases such as "on the other hand" (from your two-way checkback entry) are more chatty than informative and can usually be omitted. 
You have provided useful edits, of course, in particular noting that there was an error in the definition of the Cavendish variation of Chicago -- an error that can be traced back to a similar error in the 1976 edition of the Official Encyclopedia.
Normally, one of the regular contributors to the glossary would have made the necessary corrections, edits or deletions of your contributions on a piecemeal basis. But there has been such a flood of contributions from you during the past month that it will take considerable time to complete that task. Hence this note on the Discussion page.
Again, your time, effort and enthusiasm for the project is appreciated. But I ask you to take more time and care with your edits. Several of us have spent uncounted hours designing and constructing this glossary and we hope that an equal degree of care be brought to the edits. TurnerHodges (talk) 18:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Editor "John plaut" 

message: I just came across this article, and I have the impression that it may have been written (at least in part) by a non-native-English speaker, or perhaps translated from a foreign language.  Is that correct?  I used to play bridge at the club level so I don't think it's just unfamiliarity with bridge terminology.
Examples:
*2♣ and 2♥ openings remain its natural artificial meaning
*To play to a trick, and normally win, over a small one lead, without capturing any opponent high one.
Anyone want to volunteer to clean this up?  --Trovatore (talk) 23:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd word choices/grammar 

message: I think that this article must limit the nature of its references to online and print publications. It's all too easy to cite a book that might mention some highly idiosyncratic term, as evidence that the term has genuine currency when in fact it doesn't. I suggest that references in the glossary be limited to other established bridge glossaries such as (online) TBW's or bridgeguys and (print) any of the Official Encyclopedias. Separate articles -- e.g., the Law of Total Tricks -- should be free to use appropriate referencing (to, say, Vernes' seminal article or Larry Cohen's extension thereof). Thoughts? TurnerHodges (talk) 17:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree in principle but am concerned that this will make the glossary too ACBL/USA centric. The Reese/Dormer The Bridge Player's Alphabetical Handbook could be added to the preferred list of limited references and there may be other nominations by others.  Perhaps it is best to develop a proper Further Reading section to the glossary that will serve the dual purpose of identifying the preferred list of references as well as act as a set of filters on entries.  Newwhist (talk) 00:17, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This isn't intended to be an SAYC glossary. TurnerHodges (talk) 18:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I revised the page many times (not quite exclusively) from 21:25, 22 January 2015. Among other things, one complete pass in which I tried to cover some stylistic matters and certainly increased the degree of uniformity. What is uniform or nearly so? Nothing but perhaps the use within wikilinks of boldface for targets external to this page and initial capitals for explicit cross-references.
: ... hope to say more about some things, maybe not until learning more about [span> tags -P64
Let me alert you to most substantial revisions. The first column covers what brought me here and the rest happened by the way. Initialism in this list may represent either the initialism or the full name or both.
: ... list perhaps to be modified or continued -P64
* ACBL 
* EBL
* EBU
* ^ USBC
* ^ USBF
* WBF
* ^ Zone
* (bracketed KO)
* Captain ; NPC
* Double KO
* Knockout
* Repechage
* (round robin)
* Swiss
* Blackwood
* EKB
* (keycard)
* KCB
* Kickback
* Queen-ask
* RKCB
* Alert
* Announcement
* Autobridge
* HCP 
* x ; X ; XX
* XY Notrump ?=
=? Two-way checkback 
* XYZ Notrump
: ^ new item
: ( ) no item yet, maybe target of wikilink
--P64 (talk) 20:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This week 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Glossary of contract bridge terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091229025059/http://web2.acbl.org:80/laws/rlaws/lawofcontractbridgecombined_2004.pdf to http://web2.acbl.org/laws/rlaws/lawofcontractbridgecombined_2004.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Glossary of contract bridge terms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016222304/http://www.eurobridge.org/member-federations.aspx to http://www.eurobridge.org/member-federations.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:17, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think the term denotes a spectator in the room where other people are playing, not someone who watches the game on TV or the Internet. And the word kibitz also deserves a place in the dictionary. WikiArticleEditor (talk) 22:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The term Kibitzer has its own article and a more complete definition is given there. Nevertheless I agree that the definition in this glossary can be improved to match. Newwhist (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  So if a kibitzer turns loud, he isn't a kibitzer any more? Yeah, sure. WikiArticleEditor (talk) 22:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I guess so but only because he will be gone, kicked out, not there anymore, removed from the table, banished and therefore not kibitzing. Agree that kibitz should be in the glossary. Give it a whirl. BTW, the official rules for a spectator are quoted this link.  Newwhist (talk) 12:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kibitzer 

message: Both this article and tempo (bridge) need some tinkering with the wording, to cover the far more common case where a BIT is not deliberate, and the problem is in the UI it may create. Narky Blert (talk) 03:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: BIT

message: To receive an extra bonus for holding Ace-King-Queen-Jack on the same playing hand, isn't that obsolete also when playing Rubbers ? In some countries I'm certain this is the case. Boeing720 (talk) 00:50, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rubbers and extra bonus for cards