Talk:KataGo

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Go Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Go, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the game of Go 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.GoWikipedia:WikiProject GoTemplate:WikiProject GoGo articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Board and table games Low‑importance

	Games portal This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computer science Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles 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.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles

Low

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

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Article status

I note that:

This article is at least as good as the GNU Go article.
This article is at least as good as the Leela (software) article.
KataGo is more important than either.
The KataGo article exists in the Japanese and Chinese Wikipedias.

Some months ago, this article was moved from mainspace to Draft. This was a rather mysterious decision given the above facts. But there was no discussion and no vote; it was simply done on a single user's whim.

(If one wanted an article deleted, there would have to be a vote, but moving something to Draft has no safeguards. This process is not satisfactory. Draft status is a limbo from which it's difficult to escape, since articles in Draft are held to a much higher standard than normal stubs before they're allowed back to mainspace.)

Anyway, if a single user can move it to Draft, a single user can move it back, so that is what I am going to do, rather than go through the frustrating Articles for Creation process. If someone objects to this, please explain why KataGo in particular (and not GNU Go or Leela (software) or whatever) needs to be in Draft space. Otherwise it's just capricious and arbitrary. Evercat (talk) 01:59, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Elo

I removed the Elo section because the author apparently misunderstood how Elo systems work. One can have any number of Elo scales, with a player having drastically different ratings on each scale. Elo ratings are relative to other players in their particular scale, and Elo ratings cannot be compared across scales. There's nothing "unbelievable" about KataGo being rated 13000 on one scale and 5000 on another, they are simply different scales, and not commensurable. Nor can one say that KataGo's Elo is "slightly higher" than AlphaGo's, because AlphaGo wasn't in that scale at all. Evercat (talk) 14:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]