Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Archive 2016

Go to archive: 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022

Some Talk posted here is relocated to appropriate project subpages.

Photos from Opatija 2014

FYI, I transferred and categorized some 400 photos, chiefly of European players, from EBL Flickr account to Commons. They are located at c:Category:2014 European Bridge Championships, Opatija. Not all players are notable enough for our articles, but if anyone wants to add them to articles about European top players, that's the place to look. No such user (talk) 12:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

English Bridge, June 2016

The latest issue of the English Bridge Union's magazine for its members, English Bridge, has several snippets of news that are of interest:

• The European Bridge League (EBL) are expected to make an announcement during the upcoming European Championships (16th-25th June) about where they have reached in investigating the various alleged cheating cases that fall within their remit. (page 5) Two of these cases involve players from the Israel and Monaco teams who came first and second in the Open event in the last European Championship, and it is possible that these two teams might be retrospectively disqualified. (page 17)
• Fantoni and Nunes have been found guilty of cheating by the Italian Bridge Federation. They have received individual three year bans and a lifetime ban from playing as a pair. The EBL was due to consider the case at the end of May. (page 27)
• On a happier note, a reader's letter says that several top English women players, including Sally Brock, Heather Dhondy, Susan Stockdale and Fiona Brown have pages in the Polish Wikipedia. (page 55) I've tracked down the relevent category pages for English and for Scotiish bridge players: [1] and [2]. (There's also a British players category whose articles seem to just be the sum of those in the other two.) When time permits and if I remember (and I'm about to go on vacation for a week), I'll take a more in-depth look with the aid of Google Chrome's page translation facility.
• It is noted that there is some bridge-related material on Youtube, including an item entitled Chico Marx plays Bridge with Charles Goren. (page 5)

JH (talk page) 17:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Cheating allegations

Main article: Cheating in bridge

Concerning Fantoni–Nunes (Fantunes), I rewrote Fulvio Fantoni#Cheating allegations and Claudio Nunes#Cheating allegations --identically except the two player names. Among other things, the section now begins "Early on 14 September 2015" and gives "approximately 2015-09-14 02:20 (UTC)" in the greatly expanded refnote. This is a change from "On September 13, 2015" by inference from the current timestamp at Bridge Winners ("14 hours ago"). Perhaps "On 13 September 2015 (local time)" would be better, even now, and the detail may be undone later --if/when the article as published carries at least a datestamp. The detail is appropriate now.

Pierre Zimmermann (bridge)#Bridge career will need attention as the team is covered there. --P64 (talk) 17:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for those improvements. In reading about the recent allegations against Fantoni and Nunes and reviewing their Wiki articles, it seems that a new article on "Cheating in bridge" might be appropriate to consolidate a number of incidents over the years. This would be analogous to Cheating in chess. Opinions? Newwhist (talk) 17:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

As I depart:

1. Early this hour User:RJaguar3 deleted section "Cheating allegations" was been deleted from both Fantunes biographies. Here are convenient links to the two article histories (FF; CN).
2. Quoted at Neapolitan Club ("Allegations of Cheating: EBL's Statement"), the European Bridge League last Monday and this Monday (now yesterday in Europe) announced the commencement of two investigations of alleged cheating at EBL championships. The latter announcement evidently concerns the allegations against Fantoni–Nunes.

--P64 (talk) 00:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

@P64: WP:BLP requires unquestionably reliable sources for making extraordinary contentious claims about living people. Also, WP:BLPSPS applies, meaning that we cannot use the Woolsey post as the only source to support the claim. RJaguar3 | u | t 15:25, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Here's Newsweek covering the cheating allegations. RJaguar3 | u | t 02:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

The allegations have also now been covered in various newspapers. JH (talk page) 08:41, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I plan on starting a draft new article 'Cheating in bridge article' in my sandbox being careful about distinguishing between 'whispers' and facts.Newwhist (talk) 13:32, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I updated the Fantoni and Nunes biographies ten days ago with Daily Mail and EBL sources as well as the Woolsey reports. Someday soon I will attend to Pierre Zimmermann (bridge), and someday Geir Helgemo and Tor Helness, regarding their participation in major championships of the mid-2010s. --P64 (talk) 18:11, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the development of an article on or titled Cheating in bridge, I will put the user draft on my watchlist and comment there, as seems appropriate. I suppose you mean a new dedicated sandbox subpage, Newwhist, where dedicated Talk will be appropriate if it is appropriate! --P64 (talk) 18:11, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Is anything being done about this? There seems to be a lot of information out there to report now, and several players' articles need updating (even if being careful about rumors). There is also no information about the current championships (at Bermuda Bowl), either the scandal or the regular play, apart from the sentence I've just hastily added. W. P. Uzer (talk) 05:37, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I rewrote that Bermuda Bowl blurb. We don't cover even that tournament as a news event, as dozens cover the tennis "majors" and the FIFA World Cup. We barely have a Wikiproject so active to support the word "we".

User:Narky Blert added blurbs to the Cezary Balicki and Adam Żmudziński stubs (which don't even mention professional play on the Zimmermann team or any other). No recent revisions to their pages at Polish wikipedia (PL.wiki), nor any Bermuda Bowl coverage since 2013.

I presume that some English-language news coverage in India will be useful here. Perhaps the 2015 Bermuda Bowl will be pageworthy itself. Future tense. --P64 (talk) 16:06, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Neapolitan Club (neapolitanclub.altervista.org) provides much coverage of official statements from Europe and WBF (Home, English archives). Moments ago at Fantoni [3], for one item of their joint coverage i changed source from NewInBridge --evidently the identical item except the missing original datestamp, and posted one day later. --P64 (talk) 18:24, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@P64: As yet, there is little in BridgeWinners about B-Z except Wiki-unreliable speculation - which I imagine several of us are following with great interest, hoping for WP:RS sources of some kind. Quotes from people who personally know B-Z (or the others), either pro or anti, would seem to add nothing worthwhile at this stage. I want to hear more from WBF/ZBOs/NBOs; I'm reluctant to link even news reports, unless they add something to an official statement. WP:BLP and all that. Narky Blert (talk) 20:04, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm reading about the whole affair and there is a lot of information on Bridgewinners, but not too much useful in terms of Wikipedia WP:RS apart from the Newsweek article. Here's a collection of useful links (as of 25 august) at neapolitanclub. Basically, the accused have been mostly silent (Lotan Fisher and Ron Schwartz threatening to sue Brogeland), and authorities are carrying out the investigations behind the scenes.
By the way, I noticed that Boye Brogeland is a red link. Not just for his role in this affair, but for his overall achievements, he certainly deserves an article. Anyone? No such user (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I am pretty busy right now with other things but consider a future new article "Cheating in bridge" to be an excellent overarching article which should be created. If someone else wants to start a sandbox page, I will be happy to contribute there in due course, otherwise I will probably not be able to start it until mid October in my own dedicated sandbox.

Agree that an article on Boye Brogeland is also now of great merit if it was not already! Newwhist (talk) 16:24, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

FWIW, we have an article on bridge ethics which more or less copies the relevant laws, and otherwise borders on OR. Maybe it could be restructured and renamed to focus on violations of ethics... Just sayin', I don't have a clear idea what to do with it.
Maybe I'll give a shot at Brogeland tomorrow...pun not intended No such user (talk) 20:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Newwhist:. An article on BB is long overdue, on general principles.

A new article Cheating in bridge would slot nicely into Category:Cheating and Category:Sports controversies.

I gave away my back copies of Bridge World a few years ago; but recall that Edgar Kaplan made some observations of general interest in 1977 after the Katz-Cohen affair, and also after the Cokin-Sion one.

A source for anyone interested in working up a Cheating in bridge article: Cathy Chua - Fair Play or Foul? (I don't have a copy). Narky Blert (talk) 20:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. FYI for those involved in the contract bridge project, I have all copies of The Bridge World from October 1950 to the present day so can look up things other may remember about. Newwhist (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Newwhist: Contempt for card cheats goes back to the year dot. However, Vanderbilt (Contract Bridge, 1929, Charles Scribner's Sons, pp. 234-235) did not mention collusion in his list of unpardonable sins; he may have thought that it was inconceivable (WP:OR).

The next reference in my collection, Culbertson's Gold Book (Faber & Faber, 1936, 3rd edn. (1941), pp. 543-544) does not mention the possibility either.

Nor do the 1963 Laws (Thomas de la Rue, paperback, pp. 43-46; hardback, pp. 48-51). The hardback edition admonishes (p. 48) that "Communication between players during the auction and play periods should be effected only by means of the calls and plays themselves, not by the manner in which they are made".

The 1975 Laws (Waddingtons, p. 51) went further, AFAIK for the first time: "The gravest possible offense against propriety is for a partnership to exchange information by prearranged methods other than those sanctioned by these Laws".

(If anyone needs fuller bibliographical information on any of those references - they are all in my collection, just ping me.)

Query: what is the earliest date of an allegation of partnership cheating at a bridge (whist, plafond) type game?

Further thoughts: an article on Cheating at bridge (1) could/should cover all predecessor games and (2) distinguish between (a) solo flights and (b) partnership affairs. Narky Blert (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Newwhist: I dug out another book. Scarne on Cards, Constable & Co. Ltd, 1974; not its first publication; isbn 0-09-460490-8; see pp. 455-502). Much of the chapter recycles Culbertson. It includes the statement (p. 496) "Although I play bridge occasionally, I don't ever remember holding an honestly dealt eight-card or longer suit in my lifetime"; I would (WP:OR) stress the words "occasionally" and "ever", especially "occasionally". There is also a startled-eyebrow-raising statement on p. 497, "There is no difference whatsoever between Auction Bridge and Contract Bridge except in the scoring".

Pp. 499-502 relate directly to cheating, are relevant, and imo should be cited in any Cheating in bridge article - basically because they are just so so wrong, and are sometimes very very funny indeed. P. 500: "The sixth card from the right protruding slightly above the others but not visibly held by the fingers indicates six no-trump". I've never ever managed to convince any of my idiot partners of the underlying soundness of that scheme – so often applicable, so easy to memorise, and conyeying so much useful UI.

In all seriousness, though - Scarne was a seriously good card magician, who claimed to have saved WW2 GIs several tens of million dollars a month (p. 6) by exposing methods of cheating at cards - and that was the best idea he could come up with? Narky Blert (talk) 04:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Narky Blert:, @P64:, @RJaguar3:, @W. P. Uzer:, @Jhall1:, @No such user: Mollo in his "Streamlined Bridge' (1947) ends the book with an entire chapter titled "Do you cheat?. He was a rubber bridge player for money in the London clubs and described several cheating experiences, as I recall. I have a couple of Foster's Complete Hoyle (c1897-1926) to investigate as well. Don't have the Cathy Chua book but will try getting a copy. Another very lengthy rant which has insights as to what the ACBL was or was not doing about cheating is in Bobby Wolff "The Lone Wolff" (2008). Maybe one of our first steps is to simply develop a listing of our sources for references.

I have started a sandbox page here. Newwhist (talk) 12:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Links. New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/03/07/the-cheating-problem-in-professional-bridge Vanity Fair: http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2016/02/competitive-bridge-cheating-scandal Rolling Stone: http://www.rollingstone.com/sports/features/tricks-tics-and-taps-the-cheating-scandal-rocking-professional-bridge-20160309 Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016

I wrote Boye Brogeland, Lotan Fisher, Ron Schwartz, Ishmael Delmonte . I did not put anything controversial, just their bridge information. It would be inappropriate for me to add anything else at this time. I strongly agree that there should be a "Bridge Cheating" page. The reference should include Reese, Fantoni/Nunes, German Doktors, Fisher/Schwartz, Piemarek/Smirnov, Balicki/Zmudzinski + some to be named later. Each of those should then have their own page.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Nicolas. I expanded Boye Brogeland to a full biography, giving him a long overdue credit, with a focus on the anti-cheating campaign; maybe we should put it for a WP:DYK to get it on the main page? In the meantime, Vanity Fair published a quite detailed account on the 2015 affair [4], that we could use as a source for other articles, particularly cheating in bridge. Newwhist, have you perhaps done a draft in your sandbox? No such user (talk) 12:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Nicolas.hammond:. @No such user:. Thanks. I have a draft sandbox for related material, please feel free to deposit stuff. Decisions on what and where to apply the material can be made in due course. Newwhist (talk) 12:25, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Great. Will do, I hope. I took the liberty to refactor our recent comments into this section, as it became too unwieldy to follow (I missed your 30 September reply, obviously). No such user (talk) 13:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I think a lot of the material on Boye regarding the cheating should be moved to a separate page - cheating in bridge.

I know more about the current bridge cheating scandals than just about anyone, so it would not be appropriate for me to write any articles until a current cases has exhausted all of their appeals. If someone else wants to write it. I am happy to edit it for correctness. I think we need a page on each allegation. There is enough to write about each case, along with the details that each deserves their own page. Your sandbox looks close to ready to publish. Once it is published then those with more details about each of the affairs can add more information. For Fantoni/Nunes, Fisher/Schwartz, B/Z, P/S there is sufficient information for each to have their own page. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 16:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Summary style. We can build upon Newwhist's draft and move it to mainspace when it gets into a less draft-y shape. From the outset, it seems to be a bit too long, so we can decide when and how to split it into child articles for each case, with only a brief summary in the main, but we can do it as we go along. One sensible approach would also be to split all the 2015 events into a single page, as they have a lot in common (timing, Boye, Woolsey, crowdsourcing at Bridge Winners) rather than for each pair separately. But we can discuss on the way.

I agree that the material at Boye's page is a bit too heavy compared with his other achievements, but then, it can be argued that it's so prominent that it represents a WP:DUE weight. In any case, we do keep some material duplicated across articles in order to provide the reader with a reasonably complete coverage on the subject they're just reading. Of course, I don't mind it copied elsewhere and expanded, or somewhat shortened on that page, but we need to start somewhere. No such user (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I think the proposed Cheating in Bridge needs to be published asap, can start with minimal details on the current cases. Someone then needs to write each of the cases on separate pages. FN, FS, BZ, Doktors all need their own page. The 2015 events should not be a separate page because the start is really 2013 in Bali. FS were accused by IBL of coughing, same as Doktors.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:52, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Over the next few weeks, I will put more effort into making the material in the temporary Cheating in bridge (draft) page more compliant with Wiki policy and standards, especially with respect to reliable references. When satisfied, I will then move it to mainspace for collaboration by others. I am more concerned with the accuracy of older incidents where references to facts are harder to come by. I am not sure that the older incidents will be worthy of individual pages, but shall wait and see. My personal preference would be to have a master page on cheating in bridge where all notable incidents are addressed at least in synopsis form and, if an incident is of sufficient import, to have the master page link to a stand-alone page on that incident. It is also a question as to how much should be in a stand-alone page as opposed to a subsection in a biography, see the The Buenos Aires affair incident in the Terence Reese biography. Stay tuned and feel free to chip in as I beaver away on the draft page. Newwhist (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

I would favor separate pages for most of the cheating scandals, because each involves two equal individuals as principals, unlike people such as Rosie Ruiz (who isn't notable for anything else anyhow) and Lance Armstrong, though for a couple (e.g., Gee), it could make sense to have them as part of a biography. Considering that the Reese scandal resulted in two books, it can surely justify a separate page here. I know less about the Sion/Cokin affair. I suggest that the main Cheating in Bridge article should include sections on rules that relate to cheating and on technological measures suggested to counter it. What is the impact of BridgeWinners on the recent cases? Ma^t_chups 18:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Both Fantoni/Nunes have a section on cheating allegations, but they are out of sync with each other. The status is no longer an allegation as they have been found guilty by FIGB. The simple page on Fisher & Schwartz does not mention anything about the cheating allegation. I would prefer that someone else write that. They also have been found guilty, but by EBL. Piekarek/Smirnov don't have Wikipedia pages, arguably they are not notable enough to justify their own page. I don't think Gee deserves his own page. Balicki/Zmudzinski have mentions of the un-invitation from the Bermuda Bowl, but not in a separate section. I think it is time to get the cheating in bridge page up and running so that we can update with timely references. There is more coming (with the cheating allegations) so the sooner someone can get this up and running the better.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 02:54, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I have a tool that creates the "Bridge Accomplishments" sections for players. (See above). At some point, I will update the tool for recent (since Oct 2014) data. Perhaps that would be a good time to include European data (if someone is willing to create). When I do, we need to decide how to handle events won with a cheating player on the team. Take Brogeland as the example. With his wins when F/S were on the team, I think we mark these wins with a "*" or similar and have in the reference a link to the cheating in bridge page. There are lots of players who have won tournaments with cheaters on their team, so we need to decide how to handle on Wikipedia. There are a few players I added about 18 months ago who will no longer have the 10+ NABC wins that I used as a criteria. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 03:39, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I think that automatic update of player wins using current data from the online ACBL database needs separate consideration. --regardless how ACBL database handles all the marked men. --P64 (talk) 20:06, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

That's an ACBL-centric view of the world. Each organisation (ACBL, EBL, WBF, other NBOs) has its own separate, unique database. There is no central location (other than the flat files that I created/am using, but my solution is certainly not optimal). For a bridge player's accomplishments we need to be able to pull data from all of these disparate databases. And also be able to handle name changes (more common with the ladies than the men) and also differing naming conventions within these organizations. My tool can currently do that, but is in current need of maintenance (i.e. updating the winners from the last 18 months for various tournaments). Even then, if I run an update on the tool, I face the problem that there are ~ 200 bridge players Wikipedia pages that will need updating. I'd much rather us find a solution where for the Bridge Accomplishments we have a one line entry that goes out and pulls the data from elsewhere. For example, for Bob Hamman we have one line * "International record for WikiProject Contract bridge/Archive 2016". World Bridge Federation. that will pull in his WBF profile. I'd like to have something similar for Bridge accomplishments so that we pull the data from somewhere rather than having to manually update every person's record. If someone knows how to write such a tool, I'll be happy to see if I can create the data in a useful format. For Bob Hamman, see https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries/blob/master/results/B/Bob%20Hamman.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:56, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

NH, Work done here late in October was extraordinarily ACBL centric, as you note above: En.wiki pages were created for people with 10+ NABC wins and for few or no others afaik.

Was not 'extraordinarily ACBL-centric'. I used the following sources: ACBL, WBF Mastership, Cavendish, World championships. These are all open events, considered to be world class. I think I added about 150+ players to Wikpedia that were not previously there. No-one I added has been removed from Wikipedia. There is no reason that other data could not be added, e.g. European events etc. as long as they are deemed worthy enough. I suspect European championships are, if someone wants to make the case for Italy/Poland/France/Germany/Camrose etc. I think these are also reasonable.., if you can provide the data, i.e. who won, what year, in a similar format to what I use (CSV), e.g. https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries/blob/master/winners.csv I will be happy to add it. I used various criteria, 10 NABC+ wins was one. I think all WBF Grand Masters (there are about 100) are deserving of a Wiki entry. No-one has suggested a number of WBF wins or similar to justify a Wiki page for a player. I would say that a single WBF open world title (non Junior) is deserving of a Wiki entry. If this is the case, the data is there if someone wants to do the work. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Please don't update anyone's player records by pulling data for early tournaments from anyone's online database. I made many corrections to the lists of accomplishments from the 1930s and 1940s, probably spilling into the 1920s and 1950s.

P64- If you did make any edits to accomplishments from 30s/40s/20s/50s, and it is easy to let me know what they are, please do so. At some point in the next 6 months, probably after the various cheating allegations have their final appeals heard, I will update the data, re-run the script, and re-generate their bridge accomplishments so it is easy to add/edit to Wikipedia. There are probably 200+ entries that will need an update. At the same time, I will probably provide references to titles won by cheaters and mark them with a * (or similar) as well as providing a link to the confirmation of cheating. The data that I pulled was from the ACBL web sites, or the WBF web sites. One would hope that these are in sync with the data on Wikipedia. The only additional work I did was in merging names of players (they are not always reported on the official web sites with their correct name). Also some women winners got married/divorced and names changed. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:37, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Furthermore, how we list and annotate "Bridge accomplishments" of marked pairs and their teammates should be discussed separately from the general coverage of cheating at bridge and the coverage of specific cheating incidents and cheating pairs. --P64 (talk) 17:30, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

At the moment, FN, FS, PS have all been found guilty, two are pending appeals. EBL has announced BZ have been referred to Disciplinary Committee. This is a lot of updating. Somewhere we need to have a discussion/consensus on how to handle titles won with a cheating pair/player. This will affect many bridge player's accomplishments (50+ players - I'm guessing) - we should be consistent. If someone wants to suggest where there should be discussion, let me know. It would be good if someone can get the Cheating in Bridge page going as right now people are editing Boye Brogeland's page and this is certainly not where this information should be. You could try and edit every user by hand, including all bridge wins over the last 18 months, or we can copy/paste data from the results of the on-line tool, or better still, have some Wiki function that displays the data so we do not have to maintain it across 200+ bridge players. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

What about having a page on cheating in bridge, which would be generic, and then a separate page on cheating incidents in bridge (or similar title). The first would cover general topics of cheating and bridge and ethics; the second page would have the specific case.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Seems that there is already a Bridge ethics page. Its focus is on duplicate. So I think we need to get the Cheating in bridge published.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Bridge ethics is too closely based on Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge, and represents borderline original research, although bits and pieces can be reused. I would rather copy over the few useful pieces (lead and #Cheating sections) and redirect it into Cheating in bridge. No such user (talk) 13:04, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

June 2016

We have the cheating in bridge page, there is information in Boye Brogeland's page and also each pair. So, for example, for FN or FS, we potentially have the same information in 4 different places. My suggestion is that Boye's page just states what he did, but the specifics are in the cheating in bridge page. For each player, there is a summary, with a link to the cheating in bridge page which can have more information. We may well get to a point where there is enough information for the FS, FN cheating to each be its own page. There is enough material, e.g. description of cheating method, links to videos etc. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 17:46, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Agree that this is the preferred relationship between atricles. Newwhist (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to shortening some material from Brogeland's page and moving it into Cheating in bridge for the time being. If we decide to split that material (once it grows too big), I would prefer having all the 2015 stuff in e.g. 2015 bridge cheating scandal, because the four cases (FS, FN, BZ and PS) are closely interlinked by actors (Brogeland, BridgeWinners crowd, Woolsey, WBF.) No such user (talk) 10:17, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I think we are in agreement, except I disagree that the 4 cases should be linked under a similar page. There are more actors involved than those you mention, including some waiting on the stage wings - EBL, PPL, FIGB, DMV. Am sure Boye wants to be known for more than the cheating scandal. Each of the cases has a different origin. FS was Brogeland/Cullin. FN was Maaijke Mevius. BZ/PS/a rumoured 'fifth pair' were from Brogeland's anonymous source, "No Matter". Let's take FN as an example. This could easily be its own page with a description of their methods, examples. It can cover the history of the case, including discovery, reporting. Then the various hearings. Video links to tournaments they cheated at (video from EBTC 2014 and Bermuda Bowl 2013). Printed, could easily be two+ pages and I think it is appropriate coverage for the #1, #2 players in the world being caught cheating. Someone just need to be willing to put in the time to create a page for FN (and same for FS). BZ may be its own page though there are few public details of the recent EBTC announcement at the moment - there is possibly enough from the Bermuda Bowl 2015 incidents to add. PS probably won't be its own page, though if someone made the effort it could be - their method is public. We may want to wait until the EBL hearings are complete, then there should be enough material for its own page. There are sufficient third party reputable sources (Newsweek etc.) to be able to cite for a good article. I did make some general clean up on the Cheating in bridge page - lots of minor edits and added in some references.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:13, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Cheating in bridge (governing bodies)

This is to alert others of the above proposed new topic. I have scrapbooked material in my sandbox (linked here) and invite suggestions on what approach should be taken:

1. it own page
2. a subsection of Cheating in bridge
3. one of the above with relevant material to be a detailed subsection within each incident of the main cheating page
4. other thoughts?

Newwhist (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

There are so many cases, and so many jurisdictions that I am not sure it is worth its own section or page. Governing bodies in bridge is a more general topic. For cheating we have ACBL as its own zone, own rules, WBF, EBL then various NBOs. Look at the history, e.g. Reese/Shapiro; for FN we have potentially 5 - ACBL, WBF, EBL, Italy, Monaco. My suggestion is that if there is a section then it is just governing bodies in bridge, not specific to cheatingNicolas.hammond (talk) 16:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Lotan Fisher, Ron Schwartz (draft), Boye Brogeland and Cheating in bridge

At present, we have four places where elements of the story are documented in draft form and while I personally doubt it, some incidents might become articles in their own right in future.

In the interim, it is problematic to properly create and maintain all of these. IMHO the majority of detail should reside exclusively with the Cheating in bridge article and the Lotan Fisher and Ron Schwartz articles should have very very brief summaries (as little as two sentences) and point to the main article for details. Likewise, the Boye Brogeland article should focus on his role and the process and leave the details for the main cheating in bridge article. Comments? Newwhist (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

That seems sensible. JH (talk page) 16:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, +1. No such user (talk) 20:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree. I wrote a more correct version of the history on the draft Ron Schwartz page. I do think that some will become their own page, e.g. F/N, F/S. There is (I think) enough interest, and enough to document that an eventual page for F/N, F/S will have enough material. I will wait until the appeal process is over before creating the pages. For F/S, I suggest that we merge the content in the Cheating, with the content in Ron Schwartz. and put the majority of the content in the Cheating page. The personal pages for F and S should be short and factual with reference to the full data in the cheating page. These sections should be identical between F and S.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:04, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

 Done I have attempted to accomplish the agreed upon juxtaposition of the material but feel free to add your polishing. As one of my colleagues once said: "We don't make changes, we make improvements". Newwhist (talk) 17:07, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Ron Schwartz

The page on Ron Schwartz was deleted on June 10 by user Keegan. Anyone know anything about this? Lotan Fisher still exists. All links to Ron are now broken. I was the original author, but only put in bridge related data, nothing about cheating. Do you think he is deserving of a Wiki page, and if so, who does what about getting this restored?Nicolas.hammond (talk) 05:54, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

It shouldn't be possible for anyone other than an admin to delete a page, and even then it should normally only happen after due process has been followed, starting I believe with a "Call for deletion" (a possible exception being if the article was seen as being libellous). I'm sure that, as an international player and the accused in a high profile cheating case, he is noteworthy enough to be worth an article. I'm not well enough up on this side of things to say for certain what you should do, but I'd suggest initially raising the matter on his talk page and asking him what his reasons were. JH (talk page) 09:00, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I've now looked at Keegan's user page. He is an admin, and a link at the top of his user page took me to a list of the pages that he has deleted. In the case of Schwartz, the reason given for the deletion was that the article was viewed as being an attack page. Assuming that the article had proper citations for what it said from reliable sources, then it seems to me that deleting the article may have been mistaken, and that you should suggest that - politely, of course! - to Keegan and ask for the page's reinstatement. He provides a link to an email address on his user page, and that might be the quickest way of getting his attention. JH (talk page) 09:17, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I sent an email to Keegan asking for Ron Schwartz to be reinstated. If others can do the same, particularly the more common authors on this page this may help. Tia. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I never read the article myself, so I don't know just what it said or how well it was referenced, so I'm a little reluctant to do that at this stage. It's interesting that the Lotan Fisher article still survives, when one might have expected that to have been be taken down too. Maybe it has better references or was viewed as being better balanced? Or maybe it's just that someone complained to Wikipedia about the Schwartz article and nobody has complained about Fisher's? As I understand it, the EBL are due to announce their findings regarding the allegations at some point during the course of the currently in progress European Championships, which would put things on a much firmer footing. JH (talk page) 09:50, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I have posted to Keegan's talk page. Newwhist (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

@Nicolas.hammond: @Jhall1: Keegan has agreed to send me the article so I can 'fix' it. Will advise when and where I get it to a place in my sandbox pages. Newwhist (talk) 21:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. In looking at the history, user Caseeart requested a speedy deletion on June 10. User Passengerpigeon contested the speedy deletion stating that the negative biographical information is properly sourced. User Caseeart then re-requested deletion on the same date claiming it is "all controversy". I can not see any bridge related posts by Caseeart. I cleaned up links on Lotan Fisher and Ron Schwartz page. The Cheating Scandal page should focus on them, not Brogeland.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:44, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I requested Autopatrol rights as getting tired of dealing with speedy deleted pages and the effort needed to get the page. If anyone is willing to vouch for me on that page to speed the process up, much appreciated. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 12:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Support for Autopatrolled status provided. The draft article is now reinstated at User:Newwhist/Ron Schwartz. I have added a note on information which is desirable to add. Only a few minor tweaks are necessary and the article should be acceptable for mainspace. Please make your edits in my userspace. I do not pretend to own the article - I am just a temporary custodian of the previous material. Newwhist (talk) 15:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I made some edits - cleaned up some links. I still don't like the tone of the cheating scandal section. I cleaned it up a bit. Changed name from controversy to cheating scandal. It should be about F/S, with less about Brogeland. There's duplicate information elsewhere. His marital status, though I happen to know it, I don't have source-able information therefore do not feel appropriate adding it. It is ready to be re-released - it is similar to Lotan Fisher in terms of content.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 19:17, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I wrote a third alternative to the cheating scandal. See User:Newwhist/Ron Schwartz. I added some references. At some point this cheating scandal could end up being its own page. Currently there are versions on Lotan Fisher and cheating on bridge.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 22:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I have reduced the options for treatment of the text for Schwartz and based the majority of the current draft on your chronology of events with some additions to format and references. Newwhist (talk) 16:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

 Done The updated Ron Schwartz page is now reinstated. Newwhist (talk) 17:10, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

History of Laws of Contract Bridge

I have been unable to find anything on the internet about the history of the Laws – for instance, when did the scoring for the fourth and subsequent double undertrick change. I am planning to create a page on it, either in my own domain or as a Wikipedia article. In the view of Project members, would this be a suitable topic for an article? Could it be sourced entirely to various editions of the Laws of Contract Bridge? Maproom (talk) 11:08, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Laws of Duplicate Bridge would seem the appropriate place to add a subsection for the 'chronology of changes' to the laws from the first edition to the present. Newwhist (talk) 02:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

We certainly ought to have something on the history of the laws, but I agree that it probably doesn't merit its own article. It seems strange that we have a Laws of Duplicate Bridge and not a Laws of bridge article, though. After all, duplicate bridge is only one form of the game, even if other forms are far less played now than used to be the case. (Also, given Wikipedia's attitude to capitalisation in titles, shouldn't it be Laws of duplicate bridge?) It also seems odd that the article begins The Laws of Duplicate Bridge (also known as the Laws of Duplicate Contract Bridge and the Laws of Contract Bridge) is the official rule book of duplicate bridge promulgated by the World Bridge Federation (WBF). So if the law-book is also known as "the Laws of Contract Bridge", but is stated to be "the official rule book of duplicate bridge", does it also apply to rubber bridge (and Chicago) or not? If it applies to rubber bridge, then at the least there should be a redirect in place from Laws of bridge, and the article needs to make clear that it applies to rubber bridge too. If it doesn't apply, then we ought to have an overarching "Laws of bridge" article (or possibly "Laws of contract bridge"). JH (talk page) 09:09, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

There is a separate rule book for Rubber bridge. I will see if I can get one of the recent editors to write something. Also a separate history. For Duplicate, we should probably only list the more 'interesting' changes for the chronology of changes. Some changes from shall to should will bore most people; but some of them are relevant. Scoring changes are probably of interest, including the reasons behind them. The fourth doubled undertrick change occurred because of Meckstroth's 7 spade bid in the Pakistan v USA Bermuda Bowl match in 1981. See http://www.vba.asn.au/VBADocuments/Bulletins/vbabulletin1004.pdf page 6.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the reference! I'll be using that. Maproom (talk) 09:02, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Transclusion

We should consider using transclusion for information shared between players. For example, on Fantoni and Nunes page, they each have a "Cheating" section. The information should be the same on each page. This is easily done with transclusion. See Transclusion. See example at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Gordon-LevittNicolas.hammond (talk) 13:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Agree. Can we use the same approach with respect to the references which lists winners and runners-up to recurring/ongoing annual tournament events? In this way, these references (lists of past winners/runners-up) can be updated in one location instead of in each person's article each year. A template like that used for the Official Encyclopedia of Bridge {{OEB|edition|page}} would allow for multiple references to be located in one place and be more easily updated. I do not know if there is a practical or technical limit to such a transclusion application but it should be investigated by those with the technical knowhow. Newwhist (talk) 12:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

That is the approach I want to use for the Bridge Achievements.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Let me see if I can get the transclusion working. Please don't edit the following page until I've finished with it.Fantoni and Nunes cheating allegation. OK, done. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Suggested steps.

• Review/edit the Fantoni/Nunes cheating allegation page. This is not referenced anywhere except from this talk page at the moment.
• Once we are comfortable with the contents of that page, and also the transclusion part (which is shown above), we edit the Cheating in Bridge page, Fulvio Fantoni, Claudio Nunes page and replace the current text with the transclusion text above.
• If we as a group like the transclusion concept, then we can start to apply it to other pages.

The advantage to this approach is that we can write a summary which will appear on the Cheating in Bridge/Fantoni/Nunes page through transclusion. We can then add more material as needed to the actual page. I think this is a much better, cleaner approach. We only need to edit 1 page to cover a cheating incident. Currently we need to edit 3. Let me know various thoughts. It was quite easy to create the transclusion page - took about 30 minutes (I rewrote the article a little). If I do another one, I suspect that it will only take 5-10 minutes.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:43, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

References will appear below this - this is because I am currently transcluding the Fantoni/Nunes Cheating Scandal page. After we get this working, I will remove.

We should probably come up with a standard naming convention. We have gone with "Cheating Allegations" for any case that has not yet been heard. "Cheating Scandal" or just "Cheating" are probably better wording after the case has been heard and found guilty.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:49, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Nicolas. I see how your example operates but is there not a simpler way to do this by creating a template which is just the text to be transcluded? Then call on that template in all articles. This avoids all the warnings cited in the editing space which might scare off less advanced editors, myself included. The result is identical to that produced by your approach and has the added benefit of not necessarily being linked to the lead section of the home article. In the end, I can support either approach as a first attempt with regards to the FN case. Let us continue to be bold and carry on. Newwhist (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

The warning on the transclusion pages are recommended by Wikipedia, and are part of their example page, and are recommended to be left in. I left them in because if I remove them, some Wiki editor will probably put them back in. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 18:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

The way it works is text inside the onlyinclude brackets is the text included in transclusion pages. Everything else is displayed on the main page. The idea is that we can have the synopsis on one page, that is transcluded from all other pages. That page can also include the main body of the text for that page. We do not have to include any of the transcluded text inside the main page. I chose to include the text, because this is how the Wiki example worked.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 18:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Recent hearings by governing bodies have shied away from using the word 'cheating' and so I wonder what will stand up to challenge should the likes of F or N lodge a formal complaint against the use of that word in Wikipedia. Nevertheless, IMHO we should state 'Cheating allegation' as a section title in the individual's bio page because this can be supported by notable references in the popular media. However, it will be difficult to prove they were found 'guilty of cheating' per se when the formal hearings may refer only to being found 'guilty of irregularities'. The results of hearings as reported will leave little doubt in the minds of readers that 'guilty of cheating' is what is meant if we use 'Cheating allegations' in the section title. Perhaps too subtle a distinction but worth considering.Newwhist (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

You are probably correct. The various authorities seem to be careful to not use the word cheating. I think we can use "cheating allegation", because this is what it started with. They were later found guilty of irregularities.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 18:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

With respect to the new main pages being contemplated, I would suggest the standard title format of "Fantoni and Nunes (cheating scandal)" or generically the "X and Y (cheating scandal)"Newwhist (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Seems fine to me. I can easily re-write the F/N page. It is only linked from here at the moment. Do we need parentheses. Why not X and Y Cheating Scandal. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 18:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Lastly and with all due respect, the lead and following sections in the draft article Fantoni/Nunes Cheating Scandal are repetitive and as you imply, needs an editing overhaul.Newwhist (talk) 16:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Also agreed. We can start with what is there and then edit it later. I tried to merge the various pieces of information. Nicolas.hammond (talk)

I changed the F/N cheating scandal to be Fantoni and Nunes Cheating AllegationNicolas.hammond (talk) 21:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC).

Changed again to Fantoni and Nunes cheating scandal.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 01:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I created a transclusion page for F/S and implemented it. See Lotan Fisher, Ron Schwartz, Cheating in bridge. Comments? Nicolas.hammond (talk) 21:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Now that we have separate pages for some of these, I think we can add some detail to the allegation(s), e.g. the specifics of the allegation. F/S have passed a deadline for appealing the EBL ruling, this case is now closed - more detail can be added. F/N have appealed the FIGB hearing and have time to appeal the EBL hearing.Nicolas.hammond (talk)

I have created the Talk Page for Fantoni and Nunes Cheating Scandal, adding the article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge. I have also added categories to the article (there were previously none) including the absolutely essential Category:Living persons.

"Cheating" and "Scandal" should not be capitalised under Wiki article-naming conventions, see WP:TITLE. I have chosen not to move it while discussion continues, WP:CONSENSUS is lacking in several ways here. Narky Blert (talk) 21:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

I changed the Fantoni Nunes to cheating scandal for WP:TITLE.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 01:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

After some thought, I think we should include in the title "cheating scandal" for any pair that has been convicted, and is past appeal dates. For example with F/S, the full EBL Decision uses the "cheating" word, therefore we should not be afraid to use it. It is only in the dispositive part of the report that they do not use the cheating word. See http://www.eurobridge.org/Data/Sites/1/media/documents/EBL_FS_Decision.pdf. FS are past the EBL date to appeal. FN still have time to appeal, and have appealed the FIGB ruling, so this should be "cheating allegation". The transcluded version of F/S is in the main body - I updated Lotan Fisher, Ron Schwartz and the cheating in bridge page. I have yet to do that for F/N - the separate page on F/N is not transcluded from anywhere - the page still needs some cleanup. This means I will need to rename the FS Cheating Allegation title to Fisher and Schwartz cheating scandal. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 12:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I like "cheating allegation" in the current title: it doesn't imply guilt. A search for intitle:allegation turns up several parallels, at least one of which resulted in a finding of innocence.

An alternative to transclusion would be to use Template:Main article on the relevant pages. Narky Blert (talk) 15:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I have done some clean-up on Fantoni and Nunes cheating allegation article and commented on the matter of the title to the page in its talk page.

I have also added the transclusion of the lead to the Fantoni and Nunes cheating allegation article at the Cheating in bridge article. Newwhist (talk) 22:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Navigation template acting as an index to all contract bridge articles

The forgoing navigation template (which is maintained manually) attempts to categorize bridge related articles and is intended to be located at the bottom of each article. The recent addition of articles on cheating in bridge raises the question of whether or not a category for 'cheating' related articles should be created and added to it. Independent of whether or not such articles are highlighted in the navigation template, they could be captured in a wiki category as well. If included as a tab in the navigation template, would it be as a subtab of the 'People and organizations' tab. Comments? Newwhist (talk) 22:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I am strongly against creating a "Cheating in bridge" category, for now at least; and have given it some thought. It could be open to abuse, not least under WP:BLP. Cheating in bridge should contain the necessary links and would be easier to monitor. Narky Blert (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I hold no strong opinion on the matter. If not a category onto themselves, where then should the recent new articles on cheating be located in the navigation template? Newwhist (talk) 02:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

However, I think the template is way too unwieldy to navigate. See the criteria at WP:NAVBOX: The articles should refer to each other, to a reasonable extent... If the collection of articles does not meet these tests, that indicates that the articles are loosely related, and a list or category may be more appropriate. There is over a hundred players listed in the infobox, an open-ended category. Bridge clubs, conventions, ... those can be in hundreds as well. Now that I expanded it, the template is monstrous, and virtually duplicates the complete Category:Contract bridge. You will hardly find anything resembling it on the whole Wikipedia (and if you do, I would advocate its deletions). I think some sub-templates are fine or at least rescuable (Overview, Card Play, Championships, Publications for example), but those should be separated and used only in their respective categories. "People" certainly needs to go, probably also "Conventions". No such user (talk) 07:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Maintenance of the template is also an administrative chore. I am drawn to the idea that the existing navigation template be replaced with one which employs Wiki categories as its primary method of bagging up articles. However IMHO, the existing set of bridge related Wiki categories is not sufficiently robust to do this job at present and needs a refresh before it can properly be deployed as a tool for navigation purposes. I will think on it. Newwhist (talk) 15:04, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I've changed my mind. Category:Cheating in bridge could be useful. It has a primary article, Cheating in bridge, and the recent suggestion of an article about Disciplinary procedures in bridge would slot straight in. So would Fantoni and Nunes cheating allegation and Fisher and Schwartz cheating allegation; and also the as-yet-unwritten Reese and Shapiro cheating allegation (which would need a redirect from Buenos Aires affair), which IMO deserves an independent article: the sections in Terence Reese and Boris Shapiro overlap, and deal with the same notable event. So long as the category is for documented cheating allegations/scandals with their own article, and not a dumping-ground for every player who might ever have been accused, I like the idea. Narky Blert (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Bridge Players

The next round of edits to the Bridge accomplishments should include not only new Bridge accomplishments but also an update to the list of players. A criteria I used was 10 NABC+ wins. For ladies I reduced the number to 5 NABC+ open wins. The current list of players is ACBL-centric. I'd like to see more inclusion of non-ACBL members; we have no strict criteria for inclusion - perhaps some editors from other countries can help. I know that the next time I update the Bridge accomplishments that we will have several that will drop below the 10/5 threshold as some of these were won with convicted cheating pairs. My suggestion is that anyone who has a current Bridge wiki page is kept, even though their accomplishments may now be deemed less worthy. My other suggestion is that all titles won with that include a convicted player be marked with a '*' and a link to an appropriate cheating page. It is unknown how long the appeals process for the cheating scandals will be. As editing ~ 200 pages will be time-consuming, I plan on only doing this after all of the appeals are over. FS is in an appeal period - unknown if they have appealed. FN are going through EBL hearings. PK have had their hearing - no appeal expected. Status of BZ hearing (if any) is unknown. None have had ACBL hearings, but this is not relevant. It may be 2-3 months before I get to updating player records - I agree that the first step is identifying the trophies/awards we want to include. If anyone has any knowledge of writing Wiki macros (perhaps I'm using the wrong word), let me know. For the majority of the bridge players, we can refer their accomplishments to an outside page - saves us editing manually. Consider it similar to the aclbhof tag (am probably using the wrong terminology).Nicolas.hammond (talk) 03:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

FS did not appeal.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

FS and FN had their final appeals with ACBL in November. Result is that both lose all titles. Their teammates keep all titles except for Spingold 2015. FN still have appeals pending.Nicolas.hammond (talk)

Bridge accomplishments of players

The updating and extension of the accomplishments of players as suggested by Nicolas in the foregoing section requires a solid base for the enumeration of events which will be recognized/included as notable. IMHO the appropriate starting point for this base would be a more robust upgrade to the categorization of events in the article List of bridge competitions and awards. A standard template/format for the presentation of results should flow from that upgrade as well as some basic style rules (e.g., do we present chronologically or alphabetically; do we use the descriptive name of the event or the trophy awarded for it) and the systematizing and indexing of repeated use of references/sources so as to allow future updating and extensions should, for example, website URLs change. Newwhist (talk) 16:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

And further regarding notability criteria for people, please see the draft at Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge/Manual of Style/Appendix 5: Notable people criteria. Perhaps the criteria for notability based solely on 'wins' and 'runners-up' should be debated there. Newwhist (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Also see previous discussions at the talk page to the aforementioned list article and the links therein. Newwhist (talk) 15:07, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. There are several that need pages written. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_competitions_and_awards, follow red links. I'd like to see more coverage of non zone 2, non Europe. Are there any down-under editors. Also Asia. We'll need co-operation from various editors to determine what is comparable to the current list, but we are under-represented outside of ACBL-land and UK. The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridge_competitions_and_awards needs updating as well, some pages are "next - 2015". I added some additional awards. Again, ACBL centric.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 03:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

I've started work on the code needed to generate the data, and also updated some of the records so it should be easier to maintain. I need a list of the players who have won appropriate trophies/awards. For example, if any of the UK editors can provide a list of the players who won the Camrose or Gold cup, or anything determined to be worthy I can add those. If there are other trophies that should be added, now is the time to get me the list. At the moment, I have WBF records, I have ACBL records, including the minor National titles. See https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries/blob/master/world_senior_pairs.csv for an example format. Year,Place,Name.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:15, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

A complete list of Gold Cup winners year by year can be found here. There's a more conveniently formatted list of players with four or more wins here. For the Camrose, matters are complicated by the fact that each team plays a match against all the other teams in the competition, and it's usual for teams to alter from match to match. Searching that Bridge Great Britain site, I haven't been able to find a list of players who competed for a country during a season in which it won the trophy or in an indivisual winning match. JH (talk page) 15:44, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I added Gold Cup to my code. I updated players at https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries. Go to Results. Each player should have their own entry under this directory. As an example, I added a Bridge accomplishment section to Andrew Robson and also updated Zia Mahmood using the data from Github. Use Github as a resource for adding players or updating their accomplishments.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Any input on additional events to add, please let me know.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:54, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I have been looking at create a template so that for each Bridge player we would have a single line which would import their data from GitHub. Not sure this is technically feasible, or if Wiki-appropriate. Should not be getting data from a third party site which could have different editors. Another thought is for every Bridge player to have a separate Wiki page which is "Bridge accomplishments". In the main body, we would transclude the data. The reason for putting this into a separate file is that the Bridge accomplishment page can be auto-maintained by comparing it with an outside site. Not sure I like either approach but the latter has some merit. To give an example: I used to reference winners of Spingold by referencing the last Bulletin and previous winners. But ACBL broke the link. Now I list a reference to ACBL web site. But... currently we have about 200 players to update with their bridge accomplishments. If it was all in one place, it could be automatically done. Any thoughts on best way to accomplish this are appreciated.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Patrick Jourdain

I've created an article for Patrick Jourdain, who died a few days ago. He's more notable as a journalist than he was as a player. There are a couple of things in his article that may be of particular interest. One is his role in unmasking Tony Haworth's cheating. Neither Jourdain's Daily Telegraph obituary nor the one on the WBF site mention Haworth by name, but cross-referencing with our Cheating in bridge article there's no doubt that this case was the one they were referring to, so I've included his name in my article. Jourdain also discovered that a female player at the 2002 World Championships was not given a medal because she refused to take a drugs test, though her team-mates were awarded theirs. I don't know who she was (again the DT and the WBF were reticent), but the case was widely reported at the time so it would be easy to find out. JH (talk page) 20:32, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Disa, just played against her in Washtingon - see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/canada/1406037/Bridge-player-is-stripped-of-medal-for-refusing-drug-test.htmlNicolas.hammond (talk) 01:22, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. By chance I'd stumbled across her Wikipedia article yesterday, when looking for references to Jourdain to turn into wikilinks, and realised that she was the player in question. The citations in her article include one for Jourdain's original Telegraph piece breaking the story which you've linked to above. JH (talk page) 07:21, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Should we not have a paragraph in the Cheating in bridge article about PEDS and results of all tests conducted thusfar? Newwhist (talk) 17:17, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Done. Should probably use transclusion for this at some point as work copied in two places.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Detailing tournament results

This is very closely related to the "Bridge accomplishments of players" section below and a good example is the Bermuda Bowl. There are two things to consider I think: maintainability and legibiity. Currently, on the wiki page, there is a link to each year's results on the WBF page, and since the WBF made some changes the links are mostly broken. Automating maintenance of these in some way (probably similar solution to the accomplishments of players) would certainly help.

However the second challenge for a long running event like this is that the individual annual references make the list long and hard to read. I know you maybe shouldn't "read" the reference list but I often do to get a sense of additional reading - perhaps a solution is to change the order and ensure the external links / further reading section is above the references. A more general style question is when does one swap from direct links to a summary link like this that puts the user 1-click away from the detail but gives a clearer summary view and shorter reference section? --Pstansbu (talk) 07:28, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Agree with your point except that websites do change their structure and most of the broken links were good at one time but have been broken because of these changes. We can expect the same problem in future, so while this is good for now, it may not last. The real question is how to make the reference easy to update all in one place for all articles using it. Newwhist (talk) 13:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I cannot think of a simple way of maintaining links within a page. If the remote site changes the links (ACBL did this a couple of years ago), then for individual pages, we have to manually update the links.

The same problem exists for the player's bridge accomplishments. For this I have put the data at https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries. Click on Results. Click on their letter for their first name. There should be a page that contains data on the player. The links on these pages are automatically updated. For example, for probably most of the ACBL links on Wikipedia are broken because of the ACBL web page update. On Github these should all be corrected. I only have to fix it in one place, then generate the corrected links. There is still the tasks of updating all the player's pages on Wiki but if someone gets bored they can start on this task.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:08, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Let's consider the concept that was employed in Template:OEB to reference the various editions of The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge. Is it possible to create a set of templates within which each has the links to the winners of an event (or several events) and we transclude that template to each page that requires that reference. Then if the link changes, we need only update the link in one location (in the template). This is worth a trial and I will undertake to do a demo within the next week but I am busy with other matters, so bear with me.. Newwhist (talk) 13:30, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Bearing with you. I updated Jeff Meckstroth to show you the current links.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 02:00, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I have posted a draft of a new template I have named ACBLWinners which addresses the three most significant ACBL events. It can be expanded to add all other events. A parallel template for the WBF events or for any other governing body could be created as well. While all this would make future update to links that have been changed easier to do, it would still be a tedious task to apply the template to existing articles. It also has the minor benefit of regularizing the terminology used for such references. Can the substitution of existing references be automated. Newwhist (talk) 14:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Categories

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_February_11#Contract_bridge for Wikipedia decision on categories applicable to Bridge. All categories should follow these guidelines. [[Unsigned]

Am aware and have updated several categories accordingly; still more to do. See here and unhide table. agenda. Newwhist (talk) 00:18, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

 Done. All names of categories updated. Newwhist (talk) 19:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Steve Sion/Richard Katz

We do not have articles on these players. Should we? Nicolas.hammond (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes but perhaps given the extent of events post initial suspension, an article on cheating (Sion and Katz cheating allegation) might be more appropriate than individual bio articles on each. Newwhist (talk) 14:05, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps similar to FS (or FN). Document their wins, their history, then use transclusion for the Sion/Katz cheating allegation/incidents, then Sion/Katz law suit. Then a separate item on Sion on additional cheating. Sion/Katz are only 10+ NABC winners without their own page.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm comfortable with this approach. Their names are (as I understand it) on lots of trophies, which imo makes them WP:NOTABLE, even without more; which there is; I support the idea of an article on the allegations. Narky Blert (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Helen Portugal

Anyone know if she played under a different name? Either before or after marriage?Nicolas.hammond (talk) 04:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

BPE IE (1967) records her as "Portugal, Helen (Mrs. Morris)". The next entry is "Portugal, Morris", who looks to have been her husband. "Mrs. Morris Portugal" would be an old-fashioned (and thankfully obsolete) way of naming her. I don't know her maiden name. Narky Blert (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Notability of bridge players

There is currently nothing in Wikipedia:Notability (sports) about our game. (OK I take on board the arguments about whether bridge is or is not a sport; but this is about Wiki.) If the members of this WikiProject can agree on what makes a bridge player notable, we might be able to drop our WP:CONSENSUS into that guideline without controversy.

My tentative suggestions:

• All full internationals.
• Winners of open international tournaments or championships, including those with restricted entry. The criteria need to be tightly defined.
• People who have won more than one major national competition. For example, in UK: Gold Cup and in U.S.: the Reisinger, Spingold, or Vanderbilt Cups. The list should extend to other countries also. Multiple winners of money events like Cino Del Duca do not count.
• Writers and players not caught by those criteria, who have received sufficient attention in WP:RS sources to pass WP:GNG. Some uncontroversial examples: David Bird, Victor Mollo, and Geza Ottlik.

Comments welcome. Narky Blert (talk) 23:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Great suggestion to 'institutionalize' the criteria once agreed upon. As was noted earlier in Section 9 above regarding notability criteria for people, please see the draft at Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge/Manual of Style/Appendix 5: Notable people criteria. Perhaps the criteria for notability should be debated there.Newwhist (talk) 14:48, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the link (which I've bookmarked)! I agree that that's the correct place for discussion. Narky Blert (talk) 18:58, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

I think we should add more players and be less restrictive. I put a list of all 5+ NABC winners at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nicolas.hammond/sandbox The ones in Red have no Wiki page. There are about 15-20 players who I think should have a page. If no objection I may create short pages on all of them focusing on bridge accomplishments.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 19:20, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

All 1st/2nd/3rd places finishers in the Bermuda Bowl should have their own Wiki page. See Bermuda Bowl. Lots of red links.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 03:33, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I think all first place winners of the Spingold, Vanderbilt, and Reisinger should have their own Wiki page. Probably most of the second place finishers as well. First step is to highlight them all, similar to the work that someone did in Bermuda Bowl so that we know which ones are missing. There is some work to check the name is not already there. For example, I found Michael Becker/Mike Becker as an example. I did some work on the Bermuda Bowl 1st/2nd place finishers.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 19:50, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Also posted under Tainted titles. As there is probably going to be a mass update of ACBL titles, I'd like to add some players to Wikipedia before that work so we only have to add the square brackets around their name once. My view is that all SVR winners should have a page, same with all World Championship winners. Thoughts/comments?Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Marcus Cup

Anyone interested in writing article on Marcus Cup? It is a discontinued ACBL event. See https://web3.acbl.org/nabcwinners?time=Discontinued. I was cleaning up some player's Wiki entries, someone had won the Marcus Cup, but we have no page for it. If there are other discontinued events, these should be added.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 21:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Is it notable enough to be worth its own entry? I've never heard of it, but that may just be because I'm British rather than American. JH (talk page) 09:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

 Working  ...since I am an inclusionist!   Newwhist (talk) 12:09, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

I think it's notable enough, even though it's long retired. Obits of players mentioned that they won it. In a couple of months I will probably revisit the Bridge Accomplishments sections of all players. I currently include all ACBL titles, and WBF titles. See https://github.com/njhammond/generate_bridge_wikipedia_entries. Collectively we should decide what else is considered worthy of inclusion. I will assume all European titles. Then we need to decide on individual countries, e.g. UK and its various trophies. Arguably Camrose, including Womens/ Seniors. Not so sure about U-19 etc. I am less familiar with other country's competitions. Once we have decided we then need to get the data (who won etc.). I will probably wait until the hearings (and appeals) from all the cheating stuff is finished. We also need to make a decision on how we note the events won with cheating pairs.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 08:50, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

 Done.  In creating this article, I encountered two names (of note to me) not yet having an articles of their own: Alvin Landy and William Flannery. Deserving?  Newwhist (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Landy definitely. Flannery is more marginal, but as the convention named after him is so well-known he probably merits an article. JH (talk page) 17:51, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I create both Alvin Landy (bridge) and William Flannery (bridge).Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Lists

There are blank lines in some lists of Bridge Accomplishments. A Wiki tool is going through cleaning them up as they interfere with accessibility issues. For example, see changes to Richard Freeman (bridge) by looking at comparisons here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Freeman_(bridge)&curid=32808783&diff=734821184&oldid=729381574 I updated everyone's automatically generated profile at Github. If you are editing a player, please update the Bridge accomplishments.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 11:29, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Tainted titles

The ACBL have made rulings in the FS and FN cases. FS, FN are stripped of their titles; their teammates are stripped of the titles but only going back 4 years from the Spingold 2015.

We have to decide how to present this information, both for the convicted players, and also for the teammates, both for titles within the 2011-2015 time-frame, and also ACBL titles pre 2011.

One option is to remove their names completely, make no mention of them. See Wiki page on Tour de France. Armstrong's name does not appear anywhere in list of winners. Another option is to list their name, but with a strike through, example: Lotan Fisher.

As an example, Fantoni won Reisinger in 2007 on Cayne's team, 2012 & 2013 on Zimmerman's team. He was runner-up in 2011 on Z team. According to ACBL, the entire team forfeits 2012, 2013. But for 2007, only F/N get removed from the team so Cayne still shows up as the winner. As Cayne played 6 handed in 2007, we should list it.

Another parallel option is to create a new page "Tainted Titles" or something similar which explains what we have done, and why. I do think we need a page to explain why there is a criteria for 4 years. Simple answer it is a (relatively new) ACBL BOD decision.

My opinion is that for older titles, e.g. Reisinger 2007, we list all 6 players but F/N are shown with a strike-through, and there is a reference to the "Tainted titles" page so can see why there is a strike-through. For 2012, 2013, we remove all names and say "title stripped".

For individual bios, we need to know how to handle all the difference cases. For convicted cheaters, we can list what they won, and what was stripped. The latest announcement is for ACBL titles only. So Cayne for 2007 will have the Reisinger listed, but probably with a link to the Tainted titles page. For Z, need to decide if we include the 2012, 2013 under "Stripped titles" or if we don't list them at all.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 13:08, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

It remains to be seen what the official records of the ACBL will show once they have edited them - I assume they will do so, but who knows how quickly. Even so, I doubt that Wikipedia is bound by the ACBL approach. As I understand it, no person, pair or team will be elevated in the ACBL record standings because of the discipline imposed on any other person, pair or team. The original position of the offenders is simply empty/vacant. IMHO, the fact that a particular person, pair or team was subsequently removed from the standings should be immediately evident to the reader and should not made to look like it never happened. At this early stage and until I read further opinions and commentary from other editors, I am leaning to having the affected position in a list of winners be blank with an associated footnote about what happened. I do not favour a 'Tainted titles' page because this would fragment the information; it needs to be in one place for all to see front and center. Each person's own page would be the place to summarize all his/her affected titles. Newwhist (talk) 18:05, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

It is NOT our place to decide what to do about tainted titles. If (e.g) the ACBL strikes them from the record, we can say so; if they promote pairs or teams, we can say so; if they asterisk results, we can say so; in every case, with a WP:RS source to explain and to justify the edit. Anything else would jump the gun, and most likely fall foul of both WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. Narky Blert (talk) 21:38, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

The List of Tour de France general classification winners retains Armstrong's name, struck through. WLior (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I still like the idea of "Tainted Titles" to explain why some teams are missing players who played in the event. We should not delete them without providing an explanation of why.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 06:07, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

First, instead of "tainted" titles I would use the term used by the ACBL -- "forfeited titled". Second, there are two kinds of pages under consideration: one is the tournament result pages and the other is the pages for individual players. On a tournament results page I would strike through the names of players who have forfeited the title (sometimes part of the team, sometime the whole team) and add a footnote -- just like the TDF list linked above. On an individual player page I would add a section "results forfeited" and move there all the results that have been forfeited. Separately there can be a catalogue page "List of bridge titles forfeited due to cheating". — Preceding unsigned comment added by WLior (talk • contribs) 20:56, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I agree with "forfeited" for ACBL titles (unless they come up with yet more corrections and clarifications), but it might not be appropriate in other jurisdictions. {EDIT} It wouldn't be right in British English, for example; where "forfeit" is more neutral: e.g. an injured tennis player forfeits a match if injured and unable to play. {ENDEDIT}

"List of forfeited/removed/voided bridge results AKA disqualifications" could be a useful (and hopefully small, and almost closed) list, but would probably need bluelinks to specific events to be of value - e.g. not just Spingold, but 20xx Spingold - and certainly a more precise title. Narky Blert (talk) 23:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Remember that there are at least 4 different categories we need to deal with. This is just with the ACBL, we can assume similar with WBF, EBL. Will use examples for ACBL for 4 different categories.

1) Titles within last 4 years. 2) Titles > 4 years old by a cheating player 3) Titles > 4 years old by a team with a cheating player 4) All titles won with a cheating player (could be a pair event, e.g. Donna Compton/Fantoni World). For each of these we have to decide how to handle them on the player's page and also the Wiki page for the event. For (2) and (3) we need to decide if we list the players with a strike-through, or remove them. For me, these are "tainted titles". We can do a strike-through but need to explain why a player has a strike-through.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 05:36, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

The Tainted title term is intended to cover ACBL/EBL/WBF etc. It is not intended as ACBL specific. ACBL has stated its rules on what will happen to the titles; the IBF has spoken. We are still waiting on EBL/WBF. Their opinion is expected soon. It could be that they choose to move teams up as they did for Seniors 2013. We need to avoid being ACBL-centric in these discussions.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nicolas.hammond/sandbox for a proposed "Tainted title" page. Edit as appropriate. After a couple of days I plan to upt this page up on Wikipedia as 'Tainted title'Nicolas.hammond (talk) 15:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

I remain unconvinced that a separate "Tainted titles" page is necessary. There are already four places where the facts can be presented: (1) the bio page for each individual, (2) the results page for the event affected, (3) the "X and Y cheating allegation" page (presumably soon to become the "X and Y cheating scandal" page) and (4) the Cheating in bridge page. Surely, whatever relevant additional information is or becomes available can be located in these places.    Newwhist (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

See the sample page and how it affects the results of the Spingold. I think we need a central place where we explain the effects on the titles from the cheating pairs. For (1) the bio of the individual, we can show forfeited titles, (2) can show the information but there are a lot of titles, and no single place for explanation, (3) can have details, (4) is getting crowded. You haven't discussed (5) - players who played on teams in last 4 years (if ACBL) and also (6) players who played on the teams but 4+ years earlier. Using Spingold as reference, how do we distinguish between 2011 (Zimmerman keeps title) and 2012 (Zimmerman loses titles). If you look at the tainted title page it covers more than just ACBL. If affects EBL/WBF/IBF etc. I do think we need a central place to explain all the weird complicated rules in place.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 00:44, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Outside of "tainted title" discussion, we still need to decide how to show on Wikipedia the tainted titles. I have shown one example for Spingold in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nicolas.hammond/sandbox. This shows the Spingold table before the titles, and a proposed version after the tainted titles are removed. Thoughts/comments?Nicolas.hammond (talk) 02:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I like the strike-through treatment of your mock-up. It has high visual impact drawing the eyes' attention and, still being readable, allows the reader to get a 'before and after' effect. I am not sure about placing the note within the same table cell as the strike-through entries. Would a footnote be better? As a minimum, I would put the note below the strike-through entries. Also, I would make the link in the note to the "X and Y cheating allegation/scandal" page and not to the bio pages. Newwhist (talk) 12:17, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

For each of the times in ACBL land when a title/rank is forfeited I can add a ref to the cheating allegation for the pair. I think this is correct. We can also, if needed, create a 'tainted titles' page on the cheating allegation/scandal which lists the titles that they won. Would like to be consistent. With the Senior Bowl in 2013 the original German winners are not listed. I think this is correct. Each Bridge Organization is doing its own thing. WBF moved teams up. ACBL doesn't. I think we should use the strike-through for ACBL titles. We can keep what is happening in Senior bowl page as is. There is no mention. We need to decide when we apply these changes. We can do it now, or we can wait until after the ACBL automatic appeal for FS and FN which will be held in Orlando in November. I think we should consider doing it now (or soon) as this is the current state of affairs. If FS or FN appeal, and win, then we can revert back. We still don't know what will happen to PS titles/ranks so perhaps we should wait for this first. As/when these changes are made, they will be quite time-consuming. I'd like to look at adding more players to Wikipedia. Reason is that if we are editing all the NABC title pages, it is trivial to put in links to players. I think all winners of the major ACBL events - VSR - should have a Wiki page. Same with Blue Ribbon/Platinum Pairs winners. Same with all Bermuda Bowl winners and any other World Championship winners - they are all deserving of a Wiki page IMHO.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Regarding one suggestion that Nicolas Hammond illustrated in user space (sandbox section 1.4, Spingold), see the new user talk page (and section, to anticipate others) User talk:Nicolas.hammond/sandbox#Spingold. --P64 (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

In Nov 2016, ACBL decided that FN, FS would lose all titles, but teammates keep all titles except Spingold 2015. The ACBL Bulletin Editor is trying to decide how to show history of previous winners - they are in the same situation that Wiki is in. Note that this is not just an ACBL problem - EBL, WBF will have the same issue. Some appeals are still pending.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 14:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Sidney Lenz

I'm happy to say that Herostratus has created an article on Sidney Lenz. who had been perhaps the most glaring omission from our articles on notable players. My thanks to him. JH (talk page) 21:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your gracious words! Yes I was surprised that there was no Lenz article. I now notice that the Dutch Wikipedia has an article on the Bridge Battle of the Century (the name given in English) but we do not, and I propose to rectify that immediately; we can't have the Dutch ahead of us, here. Herostratus (talk) 22:03, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

@Herostratus: Let me add my thanks as well. We need more editors interested in contract bridge to join in and spur us all on. Thanks much. Newwhist (talk) 22:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

OK! Since y'all are so nice, here is Bridge Battle of the Century done. It has just one ref yet; it needs to be fleshed out some, and I'll do that (and probably add some more to Lenz's article) down the road; other editors would be most welcome of course! Herostratus (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

World Bridge Games

Now that the World Bridge Games is being held independently of the World Mind Sport Games, I thought that it ought to have its own article, rather than being a redirect to the WMSG, as had previously been the case. So I've created one. It's very much a minimalist stub at the moment. However there's a lot more than could be said, with the 2016 event having had no fewer than three separate controversies. There's a very good description in an article by Shireen Mohandes in the January 2017 issue of the British magazine Bridge on pages 50-53, which can be found here: http://www.mrbridge.co.uk/library/magazine.php?issue=169#169/page/50-51 - I don't think you have to be a subscriber to read it. If/when time permits, I'll extend the article that I've created, but if anybody else would like to do so in the mean time they'd be very welcome. JH (talk page) 19:41, 26 December 2016 (UTC)