User talk:Arvindn/Chess
Disadvantages over wikitex:
- much, much more verbose, even a single chess board takes up 96 lines of text as opposed to only 2 for wikitex. Trying to show games with more than a few moves would create very large source.
- This is being discussed on wikitech-l. I wrote a small script to convert a description like
rnbqkbnr pppppppp ........ ........ ........ ........ PPPPPPPP RNBQKBNR
to a table, and I've requested the developers to incorporate it into mediawiki. -- Arvindn 16:11, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)~
Comments from the village pump
[edit]With Arvindn's new system, it is now possible to have a running chess game! Click on the "d" in my signature! Comments? - Woodrow 05:30, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- The WikiTeX stuff at Wikisophia looks neat too and seems to be easier to use, but it enforces long algebraic notation which isn't so standard... Dysprosia 06:29, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Neat idea. I'm sorry to tell you, that you aren't the first one to do wiki-chess![1] [2] :-) — Sverdrup 10:42, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yes, it's a nice idea, but at the moment it's too verbose to be completely wonderful. If people want to make new diagrams in this way, I've no problem with that, but please don't delete old ones until the syntax is tightened up somehow (judging from User talk:Arvindn/Chess, this may be about to happen). And, I hate to be a spoilsport, but the Wikipedia really isn't the place to play chess. There are lots and lots of other websites for that. --Camembert
- I certainly don't consider playing any more games here. The main purpose (for me) was to actually just play around with the commands and such and see how user-friendly it seemed, if I got used to it easily, etc. While I would use one of my own pages as a sandbox to test out boards before posting, this is not really the place to play. Of course, having started this particular game, I'll play it out. It was really just a little experiment (for me, at least) to prove a point that it might be doable. Revolver 01:18, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Grr! I was going to use that argument for chess diagrams once I finished a game! It was going to be my surprise twist! However, I still see no problem with using one's user space for chess games. Why do people always steal my surprise twists? Perhaps I should issue an imperial decree about it. - Woodrow, Emperor of the United States 01:28, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Well, the point is, if you already have positions or PGN games known and want to use these, you can enter these in by the ways Arvindn has suggested. If you want to play games to generate interesting examples, you can play them somewhere else and then import them here. I don't think this is really damaging at the moment at all, but I do worry that in the future people may get the idea this is Yahoo/games. Admittedly, the line isn't totally clear between messing around, or playing around with positions, ideas, discussing stuff using boards, etc., and actual play. I would hate to see all of these things get banned or something ridiculous like that just because they are perceived as appearing to be playing a game. All those things are actual legitimate talk-related things to the encyclopedia; playing an actual game is akin to "original research", as we say at the math articles. Revolver 01:52, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- EXAMPLE: If, in the course of discussing a chess concept, you want to give a particular board position as an example, to illustrate something, ask a question, make an observation, or any other way use the board position as a linguistic aid, much the same way TeX is used at the math articles, this is perfectly fine and IMO absolutely essential to the success of the chess articles (it greatly facilitates communication). But this isn't the same thing as playing. Revolver 01:54, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Well, the point is, if you already have positions or PGN games known and want to use these, you can enter these in by the ways Arvindn has suggested. If you want to play games to generate interesting examples, you can play them somewhere else and then import them here. I don't think this is really damaging at the moment at all, but I do worry that in the future people may get the idea this is Yahoo/games. Admittedly, the line isn't totally clear between messing around, or playing around with positions, ideas, discussing stuff using boards, etc., and actual play. I would hate to see all of these things get banned or something ridiculous like that just because they are perceived as appearing to be playing a game. All those things are actual legitimate talk-related things to the encyclopedia; playing an actual game is akin to "original research", as we say at the math articles. Revolver 01:52, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Grr! I was going to use that argument for chess diagrams once I finished a game! It was going to be my surprise twist! However, I still see no problem with using one's user space for chess games. Why do people always steal my surprise twists? Perhaps I should issue an imperial decree about it. - Woodrow, Emperor of the United States 01:28, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I don't have a reply to that, I'm just inserting this to keep it from looking like I'm saying that it's the same thing as playing. - Woodrow, Emperor of the United States 01:58, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- It most certainly is! - Woodrow 20:13, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I think it's close to the line at least. All Wikipedia pages are there to support the goal of building an encyclopedia. Any other use is abuse. Now, I don't want to be a spoilsport either, and there are things such as BJAODN that support this effort by building our community. Maybe chess is like that too. Or, maybe it's helping us learn how to use the software, that's valid too. But, I think the participants should bear in mind that they are pushing the envelope IMO (and it seems I'm not alone in this). Andrewa 10:11, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Excuses:
- Wikipediholism consumes me. As I find myself spending every spare minute on Wikipedia, this adds a little more meaning to my life.
- It's helpful in learning to use the code.
- It helps us relieve stress after hours of watching Recent Changes like hawks.
- It will expand our minds and thus, our encyclopedia-building powers.
- It creates a better overall feeling of WikiLove.
- It's being done on user pages.
Wow, once again I've managed to convince myself that an idea of mine is good! It is close to the line, but I feel we should be allowed to do with our user pages as we please, within reason. Of course, it's ultimately up to Jimbo Wales whether we may keep up this hobby here... - Woodrow 20:08, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- This is definitely not appropriate for the English Wikipedia. You might have more of a chance of getting away with it on meta, but really, you should find a separate wiki to play chess on. Angela. 18:53, Apr 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Sorry, Calmypal, I can't agree. Once the code is learned and refined and stylised to easy use, this (English wikipedia, at least) isn't the place for games. If you want to play games, you can get a free account on ICC or Yahoo or any number of places that are already easier to do this. I admit, it was a bit thrilling at first, but the novelty will wear off. And if too many people start using it for this, it may cut into the bandwidth. Revolver 01:24, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Then I shall raise and donate $1000. - Woodrow, Emperor of the United States 01:28, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Unicode characters for chess pieces:
U+2654 to U+2659 : K Q R B N p (White) U+265A to U+265F : K Q R B N p (Black)
You might find http://www.freechess.org/ useful.
Rajasekaran Deepak 17:28, 2004 May 12 (UTC)