Template:Did you know nominations/Parable of the Polygons

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:28, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Parable of the Polygons

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

Parable of the Polygons

• ... that Parable of the Polygons shows that even a slight demand for diversity reverses segregation? Sources: Star Tribune, Kill Screen, Wired
  • ALT1:... that Parable of the Polygons shows that demanding even a little diversity reverses segregation? Sources: Star Tribune, Kill Screen, Wired
  • ALT2:... that Parable of the Polygons shows that segregation plummets by demanding even a little diversity? Sources: Star Tribune, Kill Screen, Wired

• Comment: I was thinking about appending ", which lowering anti-diversity bias does not" to the hook, sourcing it to Star Tribune, but the source didn't really support it; also there is the Scientific American blog which I wouldn't really call a reliable source.

Created by Wumbolo (talk). Self-nominated at 16:42, 8 March 2018 (UTC).

• @Wumbolo: I was delighted to see this in the DYK noms; I wrote a little bit about it once in undergrad, and it really is a cool and useful game. I have a suggestion on rewording the hook, as well as a recommendation to find an image that could accompany the hook if you'd like.

• The first hook, which has the clearest wording, is best. However, I think the hook's wording slightly overstates what it is that the game shows. The parable doesn't show that demand for diversity does reverse segregation, but rather that in principle, in certain iterations of its controlled model, a preference for diversity can reverse (or begin to reverse) segregation. The game is based on abstract game theory models and excludes all the complicated real-world factors that contribute to segregation/integration like racial animus, economics, job markets, historical conditions, city planning, zoning, etc. Even within the game's sandbox, as far as I remember (it appears to be down at the moment), there are some extreme conditions where increasing the pro-diversity bias still won't result in a less segregated grid—for example, if the user sets a lopsided population with an overwhelming majority of one shape.

• I'd suggest this alt hook, adapted from your first hook, which softens and contextualizes the claim:

• ALT3: ... that Parable of the Polygons (pictured), an interactive post based on game theory, shows that even a slight demand for diversity can reverse residential segregation?

• We could also drop the "post based on game theory" context bit if you'd prefer, which I'd also be happy with:

• ALT4: ... that Parable of the Polygons shows that even a slight demand for diversity can reverse residential segregation?

• I'm also pleasantly surprised to see that the game is released under a public domain license. You should consider using a screenshot of part of the post as an illustration, both for this hook and in the article itself. Although the post does seem to be down at the moment, the Wired article included two unedited images in the public domain, which show a bit more of what's going on in the game. I think either of those would look very good on the main page. It's such a visually appealing and well-designed game, and the opportunity that its public domain license gives us seems too good to pass on. Let me know what you think! —BLZ · talk 19:27, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! I agree with what you said, I like your first ALT3 hook. I didn't exactly describe what this is, because I wasn't sure how to refer to it. Before von Neumann in 2016, the last game theory DYK was in 2010, so that's what I think. Game theory is a gigantic area, but this was based on one of the most important work in it so saying game theory is fine. The fact that the original work is game theory is also important. I am kind of bad at taking screenshots, otherwise there would already be one, lol. I kinda want the early development blog post copied to Wikisource before this is on the Main Page as it is public domain too. wumbolo ^^^ 22:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Brandt Luke Zorn: the game is up and running now.

Even within the game's sandbox, as far as I remember (it appears to be down at the moment), there are some extreme conditions where increasing the pro-diversity bias still won't result in a less segregated grid—for example, if the user sets a lopsided population with an overwhelming majority of one shape.

I played with the sandbox and turns out that this occurs when the majority shapes completely surround the minority shapes and the majority shapes that don't get the opportunity to surround minority shapes end up isolating themselves in order not to have only their shapes as neighbors. Now this kind of bothers me: neither of the biases affect shapes that don't have any neighbors. (evidenced at the bottom of the post) wumbolo ^^^ 12:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

• ALT3 is approved. Per the remainder of the DYK reqs, the article is new enough, long enough, and within policy with references, a NPOV, and no plagiarism issues. I've uploaded two png images from Parable of the Polygons and included the first board as the thumbnail image for this DYK. (I tried to export the png screenshots as svgs in Photoshop, but it returned an error when I attempted to upload them to Commons.) Great work! —BLZ · talk 18:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! I like the picture now that I see it next to the hook, but in the article it's almost impossible to see the facial expressions. I hope that the white-gold blue-black contrast doesn't cause any problems with such a tiny resolution. wumbolo ^^^ 19:02, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

• @Brandt Luke Zorn: when you add additional information to a hook, it needs to be approved by a different reviewer. Are you set with ALT3? Then please strike the other hooks and call for a new reviewer. Yoninah (talk) 20:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: Fair enough, didn't realize that. New review please! Could you review it? The source of the information I added to the hook can be found in footnotes 5, 7, 8 and 9. —BLZ · talk 21:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

• OK. ALT3 hook ref verified and cited inline. Image is freely-licensed and eye-catching for the main page. Rest of review per Brandt Luke Zorn. ALT3 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 21:45, 9 April 2018 (UTC)