Jump to content

Talk:Patience (game)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US American centrism

[edit]

Someone deleted this article and redirected it to a solitaire stub.

For what good reason would you delete an article and replace it with an unreferenced stub? Dlpkbr (talk)

This article is UK centric. Few people outside the UK have heard of "Parlett". My attempt to clarify this, for non-UK readers, was petulantly reverted. Not sure why a normal person like myself wastes time with this train wreck of an "encyclopedia".77Mike77 (talk) 17:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, the problem boils down to one thing: the title. In North America this type of game is called solitaire; in the UK and much of the rest of the English speaking world it's called patience. Some American and British publishers have got round it by combining names (e.g. the reprint of that great early US work by William Dick Games of Patiences or Solitaire with Cards and The Complete Book of Solitaire and Patience by Morehead and Mott-Smith). The problem is that no-one really likes using terms not native to them and Wikipedia hasn't found a way of solving that. But just as Brits, Irish, Aussies and others have to live with North American terms for many common articles like sidewalk and truck, so, occasionally a non-American name heads the article, such as this one, and we are grateful for the grace of our transatlantic friends in not insisting on Americanising absolutely everything.
Turning to Parlett - I've addressed that. He's an internationally renowned figure who has published on both sides of the Atlantic and has written the most comprehensive book on patience/solitaire that I can find. No-one else has classified the games based on mode of play; most books either don't bother or classify them according to the number of packs used. So pointedly calling him "British" because we don't like his name for this game genre is not encyclopaedic.
If you do come across other systems of classification or facts that enhance the article by authors of whatever nationality, please feel free to add and cite them.Bermicourt (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete introduction

[edit]

The article doesn't state the definition of a patience game. It doesn't give a list of defining criteria for defining whether or not a card came is a patience game. Blackbombchu (talk) 01:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

"Magda Goebbels played patience in the Führerbunker after she killed her six children."....Citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.39.10.138 (talk) 20:02, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Heard this term in a 2013 episode of Endeavour (TV series) and thought this was indeed the same thing as Klondike (solitaire), which I was playing while watching, looked it up here to check, also saw that lack of a source and found: Knopp, Guido, 'Hitler's Women', p.55, ISBN 978-0415947305, C. Bertelsmann Verlag, Munchen, 2001, English translation published by Routledge, New York NY, 2003 (through Google Books). Gwen Gale (talk) 21:10, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Patience terms

[edit]

In the Glossary of Patience terms I could not find a term for the successful end of a game. Is it simply "won"? In German a special expression is used "die Patience ist aufgegangen".Benhomoen (talk) 13:12, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's called "getting the game out" or we talk about the game "coming out" as opposed to being lost. Bermicourt (talk) 18:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell is the second paragraph of History going on about?

[edit]

This vague section about superstitions surrounding Patience seems very dubious to me. Anybody have any more information about it? -- Pingumeister(talk) 10:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 March 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. See no general agreement and opposers seem to have stronger args. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, editors may regroup in a few months to attempt again to garner consensus for the highest and best titles for these pages. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  22:22, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– While we must always be cognizant of MOS:ENGVAR in not showing preference for any particular regional variations of English, I believe this article meets a number of criteria which suggest we should move it.

  1. Solitaire already redirects here and per WP:NATURALDIS, using an alternate, commonly-used name is a good way to avoid an ambiguous title (and parenthetical disambiguation).
  2. This article and list are already in Category:Solitaire card games, and the individual variant games found in the subcategories dominantly use (solitaire) to disambiguate.
  3. Per Google Ngram, "Solitaire" is the dominant usage overall in English (the link might fail to work directly, but click the blue button to generate the graph).
  4. Special:WhatLinksHere/Solitaire has 254 article namespace links, Special:WhatLinksHere/Patience_(game) has 104, demonstrating strong editor preference, despite the redirect.

I believe the talk pages should be preserved/archived and edit histories should be merged, as well, as a sizable chunk was split off from the original Solitaire article, which was started back in August 2001. -- Netoholic @ 09:55, 4 March 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran(talk) 11:44, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support In general, I really don't like title moves from one acceptable variety of english to another, unless there is a shared accepted title name. However, Wikipedia:Article_titles#Disambiguation does give guidance specifically suited for cases like this: "Sometimes, this requires a change in the variety of English used; for instance, Lift is a disambiguation page with no primary topic, so we chose Elevator as the title of the article on the lifting device." Therefore, I support the proposed move.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – I'm not sure I understand the history here, but I just restored the blanking of Solitaire. Talk to me. Dicklyon (talk) 05:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree you don't understand the history, and that alone is not a valid reason to oppose. We don't need two articles on the same subject just because it is called different names. My proposed move and history merge resolves this, and we can move forward with a single article under the most common and recognizable name. -- Netoholic @ 21:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I here in England call it "patience". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Due to all reasons given by the nom. I think Solitaire probably gets over the line without reverting to WP:NATURALDIS arguments but those arguments get it over the line. Shadow007 (talk) 01:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the current title is clear to everyone. "Solitaire" seems to be a term meaning everything or nothing depending on the reader. The Solitaire article (as restored) seems to be some kind of concept dab? But is there really any actual subject there. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:12, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Focusing squarely on the card game, its COMMONNAME is "Solitaire". I don't really care what other games are also called "Solitaire" in other contexts, but the card game is what this RM is about. -- Netoholic @ 05:44, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, USNAME is Solitaire, that isn't the same thing. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:59, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely none of the evidence I posted in the request is US-only. This is the primary name among ALL varieties of English. -- Netoholic @ 04:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That, I'm afraid, is rubbish. Few British people, for instance, would call it solitaire. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:16, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then I'm sure you're aware of MOS:COMMONALITY. This card game is almost never recognizable as "patience" outside of Britain, but within Britain "solitaire" is at least somewhat common or at least recognizable (as demonstrated by your vote wording). "Patience" will still be prominently featured in the lead sentence, and the history section will reflect that name when talking about the British contributions. Any confusion with Peg solitaire will be handled in a hatnote. -- Netoholic @ 19:21, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first line of the article states "Patience, or solitaire as it is known in the US and Canada...". It does not state "Patience, or solitaire as it is known in the rest of the world..." It also says "In the US, the term solitaire is often used specifically to refer to solitaire with cards, while in other countries solitaire specifically refers to peg solitaire." Is this correct? Is the card game known as solitaire in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, or any of the myriad other countries in which English is widely spoken? I don't know the answer to that one (and I doubt you know it either), but until we do know it categorically then ENGVAR clearly applies here and I fail to see how anyone could argue otherwise. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • ENGVAR includes MOS:COMMONALITY and more to the point, MOS:RETAIN. ENGVAR is not a moratorium against never swapping from one regional use to another. In fact RETAIN specifically says such changes can be done with consensus, which is the whole point of this move discussion - this very process. I think you're citing ENGVAR when what you mean WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I've presented the evidence that the dominant recognizable name in English (broadly-considered) for this solo card game is "solitaire". -- Netoholic @ 23:05, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, even despite the ENGAR argument, even despite the global recognizability being a result of Microsoft international dominance, because everyone recognises "solitaire", it has a much clearer etymology, and it enables a NATURAL title that is better to link to and is far less likely to be misrecognised as a common word. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I believe all "patience" games are card games, but this is not true of all games called "solitaire" (peg solitaire, mahjong solitaire, etc.) and the articles seem to bear out this distinction. Dekimasuよ! 07:31, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those games are separate topics already covered under separate title (peg solitaire, mahjong solitaire). Thiss card game, while it shares a similar name, is still widely known as "solitaire". Any potential confusion of topics will be handled in hatnotes... keeping this page under a less recognizable and less common name will not make this particular confusion any clearer. -- Netoholic @ 08:57, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article is about a class of games that are known as types of patience/solitaire, each separate topics with their own articles (thus all of the articles on separate topics at List of patience games), just like Peg solitaire and Mahjong solitaire have their own articles but are covered at Solitaire as well. I know the card games as both "solitaire" and "patience," but again, "patience" is limited to card games, isn't it? That is, I am still under the impression that the current title is more precise. Dekimasuよ! 18:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please assume I know what WP:ENGVAR says. You stated that the game is only known as patience within British English; I do not speak British English and do know the card games as patience; thus the term does not appear to be known as patience only within British English. This is all anecdotal, so it's a bit beside the point. I still believe there is a distinction between the meanings of the terms: only one is specific to card games. Dekimasuよ! 04:35, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed merge with Twenty-Five (solitaire)

[edit]

Article Twenty-Five (solitaire) can be added as a sub section on Patience (game) with citations. Stalin Sunny Talk2Me 02:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly oppose, simply because a) this is the overarching article on all games of patience/solitaire in general, b) Twenty-Five is up for deletion as it is unsourced and moving it here to escape deletion is not good practice and c) there are over 250 games in this genre; if we merge Twenty-Five in, we'd have to merge all the others and it would just become a huge and unwieldy article. Bermicourt (talk) 08:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been deleted, so this discussion is closed. I'll remove the tag. Bermicourt (talk) 06:08, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 December 2019

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. This has been listed for several weeks now, and there is a definite absence of any consensus.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:06, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

– Solitaire is used much more than patience when referring to the card game [1]. Out of all the "solitaire variants", the card game has the most links to it 279 for Patience (game), 243 for Klondike (solitaire), 91 for Mahjong solitare and 99 for Peg solitare. It's important to note that Solitare has 516 links, most of which are likely for the card game based on the above statistics. This also shows that editors prefer to link to Solitare rather than "Patience (game)". Mahjong solitaire gets 5,000 monthly views, Peg solitaire gets 5,300, Klondike (solitaire) gets 16,300, Patience (game) gets 21,000, Solitaire only gets 4,800, showing that patience is the most common solitaire variant and is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Category:Solitaire card games is called "Solitaire card games" instead of "Patience card games", showing edit preference once again. Per WP:NATURAL, "Solitaire" is preferred over "Patience (game)" because it has less detail in the title. Pinging everyone who took part in the previous move discussion at Talk:Solitaire (disambiguation): @Netoholic, Nohomersryan, and Zxcvbnm:. – BrandonXLF (talk) 22:36, 7 December 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:37, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The result of the move request was: Again there is no consensus for this move. It seems that US editors prefer Solitaire while British editors prefer Patience. It would be interesting to know what term is used by other English speaking nations, and some analysis of Ngrams might be helpful in any future discussion — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:16, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reopened discussion per request on my talk page — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:34, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per WP:NATURAL, since it doesn't require disambiguation. (Took the liberty of fixing the typo in the RM).ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - pretty clear that the WP:COMMONNAME in English of this class of games is just "solitaire", and that it is the primary topic meaning of that term. -- Netoholic @ 21:36, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. For several reasons. First, it's only called solitaire in America; the rest of the world uses Patience and per WP:ENGVAR we shouldn't prefer a regional spelling over a universal one. Second, Patience was the game's original name. Third, Solitaire is also the name given to an old peg and board game so it's confusing and will require disambiguation despite the claims above, whereas, fourth, there is only one game called patience and that is the card genre. Fifthly, there is plenty of precedence for reliable sources using Patience e.g. Parlett's The Penguin Book of Patience, probably the most comprehensive book on the subject. Sixthly, one of the reasons there are so many links to solitaire here is that some editor has created a whole bunch of unsourced or non-notable computer game articles which use the American name and "editorial preference" has never been a criterion for article naming; in fact it's deprecated as being WP:POV. Seventh, it is incorrect to say that "patience is the most common solitaire variant". Patience is, and has always been, the overarching name for this genre of card games and "solitaire" is a later, regional term. One is not a subset of the other. Bermicourt (talk) 08:59, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Also per WP:ENGVAR "When more than one variant spelling exists within a national variety of English, the most commonly used current variant should usually be preferred". We aren't making this move to prefer one variation over the other - we're making it 1) because in aggregate of all forms of English, the term "solitaire" is the most common, and 2) It eliminates the need for disambiguation (see the ENGVAR example of elevator vs. lift), and 3) "solitaire" is a WP:COMMONALITY recognizable to almost all English speakers (the game is often called "patience solitaire" . You cite ENGVAR but don't apply all its aspects... it is your vote that is pushing for one national variety over the other. Partlett has also penned another book on the subject named Solitaire: Aces Up and 399 Other Card Games. Your 2nd point about patience being the "original name" is not a naming criteria... terms for topics often change over time and Wikipedia prefers the most common term used in current references. -- Netoholic @ 19:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. For what it's worth, my gut feeling is that "solitaire" has overtaken "patience" as the name of the card game in the UK, almost certainly as a result of Microsoft Solitaire. At the very least, when you say "solitaire", people think more of the card game than the peg game. Sceptre (talk) 00:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. "Gut feeling" is not really a valid reason. The Cambridge Dictionary is still very clear that "patience" is the UK term and "solitaire" is the US term. Merriam-Webster (the American dictionary) agrees. In addition, Patience is also the name used in other countries around the world including those in Europe. Bermicourt (talk) 11:55, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as per Bermicourt. To me in the UK, patience is a card game for a single player while solitaire is a marble hopping/removal game on a specially designed board. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The proposal does not address where the article currently at Solitaire is to be moved. @BrandonXLF:. --В²C ☎ 17:57, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Born2cycle, it will be redundant to Solitaire (disambiguation). – BrandonXLF (talk) 19:23, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME because patience is generally not recognized as a card game in American English, but Solitaire is, more and more, recognized as a card game in all varieties of English. Usage in other languages is irrelevant. I think the nom could have been clearer about overwriting the existing article at Solitaire, but this has been cleared up just above. --В²C ☎ 01:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. A straight WP:ENGVAR case. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SmokeyJoe, why the change in stance since your thoughtful support last time?
  • Support, even despite the ENGAR argument, even despite the global recognizability being a result of Microsoft international dominance, because everyone recognises "solitaire", it has a much clearer etymology, and it enables a NATURAL title that is better to link to and is far less likely to be misrecognised as a common word. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
--В²C ☎ 17:55, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
B2C. What’s changed is that the previous discussion closed “no consensus”, it was controversial. That adds weight to ENGVAR. ENGVAR is meant to discourage repeated arguments that come down to ENGVAR. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
And yet what tends to happen is the arguments are repeated until the title better-supported by policy (per your own 2018 argument) is chosen. It can take years to get there, however, because enough people object repeatedly - like you did here - along the way to create the appearance of a lack of consensus, when community consensus (as reflected in policy per your 2018 argument, again) favoring the move is there along. --В²C ☎ 01:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I do like my 04:32, 15 March 2018 argument, but consensus is that that this question (solitaire vs patience) is at "no consensus" which means that the role of ENGVAR is elevated relative to my weighting of it the first time. I think it is better to regard the Talk:Patience_(game)#Requested_move_4_March_2018 decision as decisive, not to be repeated every 6 months, or even every 18 months, unless there are compelling new arguments, which I think there are not. Title stability is not achieved be repeatedly seeking to repeat past discussions on achieving a slightly better title. "Slightly better" does not overcome ENGVAR and does not overcome TITLECHANGES. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:56, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I hear you SmokeyJoe, but surely you recognize that nine participants including the nom is a very small sample size to definitively establish anything for the entire community, especially considering there wasn't even a local consensus. My reading of that 2018 RM is that you got it right, and the majority missed the mark. But there was a slight majority opposing and the closer understandably found no consensus to move. Notably, they did not find even WP:LOCALCONSENSUS to oppose; so I see no guidance from that to influence us here. And your argument then still resonates the same today; even more so I daresay. --В²C ☎ 17:57, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for the same reasons I opposed last time. Dekimasuよ! 15:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • As someone in England I think the term "solitaire" is a bit more common than "patience" but I don't have any evidence of that. As noted the computer programs use "solitaire". Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. There is no mitigating factor and there is no excuse. WP:NATURAL is used over WP:RETAIN. Elevator is a perfect example. Red Slash 22:16, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment WP:NATURAL is a particularly weak argument against the non-US WP:COMMONNAME of Patience which only refers to the card game, whereas Solitaire (card game) will have to be disambiguated from Solitaire (board game), Solitaire (jewellery), Solitaire (song) and a host of other articles. Bermicourt (talk) 19:47, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Bermicourt, patience also refers to Patience and other things as well at Patience (disambiguation), making the current title even worse because the card game is not the primary use of the word patience whereas the card game is the primary use of the word solitaire. There is no Solitaire (board game) and no Solitaire (card game). The boardgames have other names that work that are commonly used such as Mahjong solitaire and Peg solitaire. Disambiguation is required for both patience and solitaire.– BrandonXLF (talk) 21:18, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Both words require disambiguation so the argument from WP:NATURAL is flawed. Solitaire the card game is hardly the primary topic - most people think of a solitaire as a diamond - and will not survive much longer without being dabbed. Even dictionaries list multiple meanings for "solitaire" and annotate the card game as "N Am" i.e. regional to North America. Not to mention that "solitaire" is often used, confusingly, to refer to the game of Klondike so another reason it will need to be dabbed. Bermicourt (talk) 11:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • The argument from NATURAL is not flawed because the Support argument here is that this use of Solitaire is the primary topic and therefore does not require disambiguation for this article. --В²C ☎ 18:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
          • Bermicourt, can you provide a source for you claim that "most people think of a solitaire as a diamond"? And why would it not survive without being dabbed? The current solitaire article doesn't even mention diamonds and is a very small article in a pretty bad state, so I see no article replacing the card game as the primary topic of solitaire in the future. There are multiple meanings for solitaire, that's the point of Solitaire (disambiguation) and hatnotes. Solitaire is used to refer to Klondike because Klondike is a form of solitaire, proving once again that the card game is the primary topic of the word solitaire. It's like Football and American football, despite the fact the word football doesn't normally refer to the family of sports, the article Football refers to the family because all the sports (such as American football) are types of football.– BrandonXLF (talk) 18:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
            • The lack of mention of Solitaire_(jewellery), and the zero mentions of “solitaire” at gemstone, reflects I think US dominance of systematic bias, and the reason for ENGVAR. I have seen people play patience. For me, people playing with real cards play patience, and people playing solitaire are doing it on the computer. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
              • SmokeyJoe, the computer game and the card game are the same game and are thus both referred to as solitaire, at least for me. I do agree there's a lot of US dominance, but that's because most readers and editors are from the US because of the US's large population of English speakers. The point of Wikipedia is to build an encyclopedia for the readers and if most are from the US, then that means that's who we should appeal. It should also be noted that solitaire is mentioned at wiktionary:Solitaire as a single gem and the solitaire as in jewellery definitely fits as a Wiktionary entry rather than a Wikipedia entry.– BrandonXLF (talk) 02:51, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                • No User:BrandonXLF, Wikipedia is not for the majority readership, but for all readers, and in practice that means actively resisting systematic bias in favour of the majority. You seem unfamiliar with WP:ENGVAR and WP:RETAIN, which I think enjoy very strong community support. This is not dissimilar to WP:ACCESSIBILITY, under which presentation quality of the majority is compromised for the sake of those with disabilities. We DO NOT appeal to the majority.
                  The physical card game I learned is NOT the same game as the Microsoft MS-DOS game. I don’t think the gem mounting style impacts the PT argument mentioned, but I do think it needs a mention at gemstone. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:30, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                  • SmokeyJoe, my argument for moving the page isn't because Solitaire is used by more people. I'm not talking about the Microsoft version of solitaire, but that is the most popular one. There are different versions of solitaire both on computers and physically, but they are referred to as solitaire (at least where I am). If you learned one type playing cards and a different type on the computer, they would appear to be different, I, for example, play Klondike as the card game and on my computer, so they are exactly the same game for me. If Wikipedia is for all readers,which it is, then why would you want to appeal to the minority over the majority? In this case, I believe that the majority of readers call the game solitaire, so moving it would make sense so we can get as close as we can to serve all readers. I am aware of WP:RETAIN, which is why the variety of English is not my main point. It is also important to note that the article about the card game was originally at Solitaire, and this article was a redirect, but then the content was transferred to this article [2] and Solitaire slowly became what it is today. – BrandonXLF (talk) 03:48, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I am not arguing for the minority, but for the long-standing policy that pages should not be moved from one English variety to another without a very good reason. While I supported last time, I do not support this time because there are no good new reasons. It is not ok to keep repeating RM proposals until you get your way. The bias supported here is for the choice made by the original article author. I think it is easily justified to give the original author that extra weight. Also because both RMs and title changes are somewhat disruptive. I created a mention of “solitaire” at Jewellery, and changed the redirect Solitaire (jewellery) to point to it. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                      • It's totally wrong to assume that, because the majority of editors are American, that the majority of readers are American. There are huge populations of English speakers across the world, both in countries where English is the primary language (Australia, Britain, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand) as well as countries where English is an official language (India, South Africa, the European Union); not to mention the millions for whom English is a second language. They are our readers, even if they are not fully represented by the editor population. It is certainly not Wikipedia policy to follow the preference/language of the majority of editors. Bermicourt (talk) 18:40, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
                        • I read that as correct, and not challenging anything I have said. I make no assumptions about who the readers are. It's about the sources, and if sources reflect the existence of regional variations, then WP:ENGVAR/RETAIN applies, which requires a very strong case to swap. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:16, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per ENGVAR/RETAIN, as noted. I understand the arguments for Solitaire, but per the rationales already given by SmokeyJoe, Dekimasu, and Bermicourt, the current title seems more precise, and retaining it more inline with our guidelines. ╠╣uw [talk] 16:31, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per RedSlash, esp. the second proposed move here, for which there's little excuse not to move on (worldwide) WP:COMMONNAME grounds. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The target is occupied by an article on "Solitaire" (another thing that should give us pause about this move request), which includes things like peg solitaire that are not part of this article. That is, the scope of the two articles is different, whether there was an article at "Solitaire" first or not. If you want to argue that this should be merged to the parent article at Solitaire, then I think that is a different discussion from what's been going on here. Dekimasuよ! 06:31, 26 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom's statistics above. It clearly shows that while this might be an engvar issue, one version is clearly more sought out by readers. This will be a WP:LEAST surprising title for most of our readers. For what it's worth, per the article, the origin is not in the UK, but German or Scandinavian in origin so "Patience" is not it's "first" or "original" name. Also, while the article claims "solitaire" is used in US and Canada, it's also known as that in the middle east while I've never heard of "Patience" (even-though my country is a former British mandate). --Gonnym (talk) 15:42, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per ENGVAR. Also Solitaire works fine as a disambiguation page. Renaming this page would require renaming that page as well as changing many links to redirect them to their new names.--Countakeshi (talk) 06:07, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Countakeshi, there would be no need to rename the Solitaire page as Solitaire (disambiguation) exists and is a much better disambiguation page. An argument could be made the title for the card game should be "Solitaire" per WP:ENGVAR since the article about the card game was orginally at Solitaire and was not a stub at the time. The contents were copy-pasted moved from Solitaire to Patience (game) (see [3] and [4]). – BrandonXLF (talk) 06:32, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Parlett?

[edit]

Anybody outside the UK heard of "Parlett"? Whoever he is, he should be informed that in North America, Solitaire is NEVER played by more than one person, and hence Solitaire is the better name. Also, the game requires no more patience than any other card game; in fact, Solitaire requires less patience, because you don't have to wait for the other players. The lede is a mess, basically.77Mike77 (talk) 14:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Parlett is an internationally renowned card game historian and games expert whose books have been published in New York, Toronto, Delhi, Karachi, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Nairobi, Cape Town, Melbourne and Auckland. His games have been published in ten languages and he has won 3 Game of the Year Awards including one from Germany. A quick glance at his books shows that he's well aware that Americans, like the rest of the world, play multi-player solitaire games such as Spite and Malice (first published by American, Easley Blackwood) and the very popular Nerts or Racing Demon. Hope that helps. Bermicourt (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess when they put a GROUP of men into a "solitary confinement" cell, they can share a game of Solitaire together. Hopefully, this will help you to understand that the phrase "multiplayer solitaire" is laughably oxymoronic, no matter who uses it. Does Parlett not own a dictionary in which the word "solitary" is defined? Let us suppose that some populations refer to bicycles as "2-wheeled unicycles": would the fact that they are abusing the word "unicycle" not be worth pointing out?77Mike77 (talk) 16:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't resort to sarcasm. Whether you like it or not, the fact is that "multiplayer solitaires" or "competitive patiences" exist. Players the world over are always experimenting and changing games, so why not turn a good patience-solitaire into a competitive game? And there's nothing particularly British about this; even that quintessentially American publication "Bicycle Official Rules of Card Games" contains a game they call "Double Solitaire" in which "two people can participate". Double Solitaire??? Well, the English-speaking world is full of amusing oxymoronic phrases; let's just chuckle and move on. Bermicourt (talk) 20:34, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point. "Jumbo shrimp."77Mike77 (talk) 18:07, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha - I like that one. Bermicourt (talk) 18:19, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Churchill Solitaire

[edit]

Supposedly played by the very late Winston Churchill, and supposedly very challenging. Needs to be here! 192.208.56.163 (talk) 23:28, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you have reliable sources, it should be created as a separate article. Bermicourt (talk) 12:08, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update of the Patience games list just completed

[edit]

I have just finished a careful review of all the entries on the page List of patience games, to ensure that it is accurate and current. Alternate names as well as names of variants covered on Wikipedia are all included.

A significant amount of effort has gone into systematically and accurately reviewing the list of games there, so please be careful when making changes to ensure continued accuracy and completeness. Naturally all additions should also strive to meet the usual criteria for notability and sourcing.

I've also gone carefully through all the existing articles themselves to overhaul them where needed, and make them more polished and complete. Unfortunately not many people with expertise on solitaire and with access to good references on this topic are active on Wikipedia. So the number of reliable contributors in this area is very small, and as a result extra care is needed not to remove content too quickly. Gregorytopov (talk) 04:06, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gregorytopov: thank you for your work on this. The whole area was something of a mess and, a while back, I started to clean it up and classify the games following Parlett's system, and using my small library of classic patience & solitaire books, but you have taken it so much further. There are 3 good traditional Hungarian patiences I'd like to add, which were passed to me by a fellow researcher, but I need to find sources for them first. Well done and keep up the good work! Bermicourt (talk) 07:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to have been able to add significant improvements to the entire patience section, which includes numerous citations from all the books I have about patience games. Gregorytopov (talk) 13:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of imported material

[edit]

I've just reverted the material imported by User:Onceinawhile from Solitaire which appears to be a reaction to the recent AFD request not going through. The history of patience/card solitaire needs a considered expansion here, and a balanced overview at the other article alongside the history of other types of solitaire game. All properly referenced of course. I am happy to do that in a few weeks, but don't have the time right now.Bermicourt (talk) 09:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bermicourt: this is a contravention of WP:OWN. You don't have time to read edits made by another editor, you believe you know what was in the mind of the other editor, so you revert it until you have time to think about it later. That is unacceptable behavior. Take 5 minutes, consider the edits on their merit, and then later come back to improve further if you like.
Unless you can explain actual content based objection to your reversion here, it will be added back. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please follow the Wiki process of WP:BRD. Did you look at the sources when you cut and pasted them in here? Do they say what is cited? And what other sources do you intend to use to improve the history section further? Bermicourt (talk) 10:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit introduced a number of problems. First, it is not "unclear" where Patience came from - except to those who don't look at continental sources. Nor is it unclear where the term "(card) solitaire" came from: it was an American invention, by Dick IIRC, even though the early American sources used the English, French and German word "patience". Also the words used do not align with the citations and that needs to be untangled. So you appear to be importing errors from one article to another without checking the original sources. In expanding the history section we need to double check all the citations and make sure they are an accurate reflexion of the sources. Of course, you're welcome to do that, but that doesn't seem to be happening so far. Bermicourt (talk) 10:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bermicourt: WP:PROMERGE states "Ideally, do any necessary copyediting and rearranging in a separate, second edit rather than when you first paste the moved text (to simplify attribution)." So step 1 is bring in all the additional text and sources, step 2 is fix and improve it. Step 2 cannot be done if step 1 is reverted.
Separately, your approach here goes directly against the advice at WP:BABY. Your critique pertains to a small minority of the added information, yet you revert the whole.
I intend to add back everything other than what you have explicitly identified concern with. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please look at the sources being cited before adding new material. Bermicourt (talk) 21:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is fine for now. I have a lot more information to add in due course. Bermicourt (talk) 08:39, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

[edit]

Please comment at Talk:Solitaire#RfC: What should be the scope of this article? Onceinawhile (talk) 20:16, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Patience_(game)&oldid=1195097377"