Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Manual of Style

no trump or notrump

I prefer "notrump" rather than "no trump". To me, "notrump" is more concise; "no trump" is distracting in a bridge context. We are eliding the space in bids and cards (specifying "2♥" rather than "2 ♥"; strictly speaking the latter better represents "two hearts"), so why not use notrump as well? The article does not say it, but I think we want to use NT (e.g., "2NT", without a space) in bidding. Ray Spalding 00:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I started this as a proposal, i.e. a soapbox where we seek consensus; of course, some of those are my personal preferences (and I do occasionally take the liberty to act according to them), and shouldn't be taken as a law until more thoroughly discussed. You're certainly welcome to edit the page. In general, we should use Pavlicek's and BW guidelines with slight modifications. As for "notrump" vs. "no trump", I must say that I personally often use the former, as it's less clumsy on occasions. I think I was persuaded by a talk page of some article (can't find it right now), however, e.g. we used them interchangeably at Talk:Contract bridge and we have Forcing notrump article. I'll scratch the entry, as undecided at best.Duja 09:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also prefer "notrump" and agree we should use "NT" in bidding. Matchups 02:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"notrump" and continue moving in that direction (eg, "cuebid"). --P64 (talk) 21:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also prefer "notrump" and that we should use "NT" in bidding. Given the lapse in time and the foregoing concensus, I have edited the project page accordingly. Newwhist (talk) 23:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Subequent review of style manuals (see Pavlicek Article 7Z69 confirm that 'notrump" is preferred over "no trump" Newwhist (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

– "notrump" is the official project style

Newwhist (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

article formatting

I'm going to remove the portions of this section which discuss article naming. I've started a separate page on this topic at /naming conventions, as suggested by the main page. Matchups 02:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

specific cards

"Use deuce rather than two, jack rather than knave and three rather than trey." – deuce rather than two!? I suppose that is vandals work. [No, not vandals work. See below. --P64]

– Use two simply typewritten digits "10" for the ten? (ten or the ten?)

– "♠K" and ♠3 in prose?

leads the king ♠K ; plays the three ♠3
leads the ♠K ; plays the ♠3
leads ♠K ; plays ♠3

In other words, does "♠K" mean spade king and king of spades? or the spade king and the king of spades? --P64 (talk) 21:57, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that deuce sounds archaic; allowing the use of trey and not deuce is inconsistent. Suggest consensus to modernize the language and avoid use of either.

(interjection) Edit history reveals that User:Duja prescribed deuce and three in the first draft five years ago.--P64

I have thumbed through the Pavlicek and Bridge World documents (see Reference section) and found that the suggestions for deuce and trey are found in the Bridge World reference. Before going further on editing this manual of style, I am going to review all of the references and make a table of their positions on each key subject and then post the results; this may take a few days, though. Thereafter, a discussion on the findings may make acheiving a consensus easier. Newwhist (talk) 18:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have thumbed through my Official Encyclopedia of Bridge and find phrases like: "leads the ♠K" and "...now the ♦K and ♦A are cashed, West unblocking the ♦Q under the ♦K to avoid..." and "...the ♥8 is played..." in prose. Newwhist (talk) 01:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re rank and denomination symbols, here are some hasty suggestions:

Use one symbol from each set to specify one of 52 cards or to restrict rank (♣H, ♣x). Do not use a rank symbol or a denomination symbol alone; spell it out instead.
Use an article (the ♣K) except with a conjunction (the ♣K or ♣Q).
What about ♥x in prose? Never use it (instead, say, "lead any heart spot")? Use it only with a quantifier (say, "lead any ♥x")?--P64 (talk) 18:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

specific bids or contracts

Re level and strain symbols:

Use one from each set to specify one of 35 bids or contracts or to restrict strain (3m).
What about 3♣, 3m, and 3NT in prose? How much to use them and preceded by which determiners? (the 3♣ bid [about a particular auction]; a/the 3♣ response to opening 1NT; a/either/both 3M reply to Stayman; every 3NT bid) --P64 (talk) 18:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

description of play

or narration — there may be too many section headings in this Manual

These sentences or verb phrases are clear.

follow with the king of spades (or follow with the ♠K; not ~~"follow with ♠K"~~ per above)
lead the king; underlead the king

So are these.

win with the king; duck with the king; finesse with the king

But these may not be clear. Do they now have unequivocal meanings in bridge english?

win the king; duck the king; finesse the king

--P64 (talk) 20:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one has yet replied so I have taken the liberty of revising my one-year old contribution. --P64 (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vugraph

> "Vugraph is to be spelled solidly and with a capital V only."

The article is titled VuGraph. Four articles link to that one and all four give linkname "VuGraph".

There are no links to "Vugraph" except from WPCB and from the obsolete User:Duja/Bridge

> "(or is it VuGraph, Vu Graph, Vu-Graph, vugraph, or vu-graph? A web search is inconclusive. Let's get the right answer from the ACBL before naming the article.)"

Nor is there any link to "viewgraph". --P64 (talk) 16:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At the Bridge Base Online play site, it is spelled "Vugraph". Newwhist (talk) 21:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved VuGraph to Vugraph and revised the few links. This matches usage at BBO (reported just above) and fits MOS. There is support in the Official Encyclopedia of Bridge, if its 5th edition (1994) entry is correctly transcribed here.

> "In 1991 the ACBL commissioned Fred Gitelman, a Toronto programmer, to develop a computer vugraph program with a grant from the estate of Peter Pender. The vugraph was subsequently named the PenderGraph."

Note that the word is used both as ordinary noun and as adjective. --P64 (talk) 20:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Play by play table

I wonder whether this 8-column table is easier to follow than the 5-column table Pavlicek recommends. --P64 (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that your 8-column table is easier to follow but only if you are already familiar with the 4-column style. If you are not, it may be very problematic. Is there some way to add keys to the 4-column table which visually tells the reader who won each trick and what the lead to each trick is, such as color coding, bolding, italicising? Will contemplate and put some options on your sandbox page. Newwhist (talk) 18:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead phrase

Should there be recommended boilerplate wording and links such as "In the card game contract bridge ..."? --P64 (talk) 00:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

People

Are articles on bridge people covered elsewhere?

Probably there should be some recommended features, even recommended layouts, in a big class of articles on bridge players. One is the list of important playing achievements, which many biogs do have, laid out a few years ago. --P64 (talk) 00:39, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Manual of Style style

This article and its children, the Manual of Style broadly, will benefit from consistent use of italics, single, and double quotation marks. I think it's clear we should being with italics. When should they be used for a term in contrast to a title? --P64 (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]