Talk:Ataxx

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games 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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (7 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (3 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Untitled

The Ataxx article is a bit...bad. I really enjoy the game...doesn't anyone know anything else about it? Nominaladversary 01:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Im gonna fix this up a bit.

Boogers merger

The Boogers article says merging the two has been suggested. Where is the suggestion? Boogers was interesting because it could be played with three or four players and chatting both openly and privately was integrated into the game. This promoted shady non-aggression pacts, ganging up, and stabbing your friends in the back. The three player variant was unique because the player in the middle arguably started at a disadvantage. To my knowledge no existing version of Ataxx attempts to incorporate any of these elements. If you want that dynamic, you're pretty much stuck with StarCraft. --einexile 16:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the strategy section, does anyone know how the best humans fare against computers? Turgonml 14:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ataxx Complexity

"This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims." It was original research, sorry i should have added that myself. I did the research for an undergrad thesis. Anyone know if its accurate? Turgonml 11:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just publish it somewhere on the internet, and cite it here. Then there can be discussion about accuracy and how good a citation this is. (good, if it's a universities site) --80.136.105.200 16:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Other Versions" vs. "Attaxx Clones"

I don't see the difference. Why not merge these sections? Hexxagon, for example, is cited as "Attaxx clone" on [1], while it's called an "other version" here. As it's been shareware for a long time, and I'm searching for more info for the article List of liberated software, I'd like to know which definitely was first, and how they relate to each other. --80.136.105.200 16:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:7thGuestLabPuzzle.JPG

Image:7thGuestLabPuzzle.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strategy

I noticed the strategy section was removed some time ago. I thought it was sort of useful. Anyone mind if I put it back?. Turgonml 01:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was removed for two reasons: It was original research and Wikipedia is not a gaming guide. Sorry, I'd like this type of information too. — Val42 22:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True but strategy is not the same as a gaming guide. Check out the Chess_strategy page. It's not referenced either. Turgonml 02:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Boogers.jpg

Image:Boogers.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Object of the game

"The object of the game is for the player to make pieces constitute a majority of the pieces on the board at the end of the game". This make no sense to me. Maproom (talk) 15:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]