Talk:Armchair General (magazine)

Fair use rationale for Image:ACG Cover.jpg
Image:ACG Cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 04:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I realise I am responding to this message about 2-years too late, but I was (still am, I suppose, technically) on the staff of ACG when the image was uploaded and did so with the full knowledge of the owner, so I thought it was OK to load it up. However it's probably the only article I've ever actually edited, hence my failure to respond at the time.

Would that have been a good enough reason to keep it? I'm not terribly up to date with the rules as you might gather.

In fact, given the COI rules, I probably shouldn't have attended to the piece at all, which is why I won't touch it again now.

Doctor Sinister (talk) 23:01, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 2 August 2015

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

The result of the move request was: moved. And redirect the current title to Armchair general. Can the proponents of the move please make sure that Armchair General|all the incoming links are fixed. Jenks24 (talk) 15:42, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Armchair General → Armchair General (magazine) – I do not think that this title is, in any way, disambiguated from the topic of Armchair general. "General" is a word that people are, I think, very likely to search for in capitalised form. A search on "an armchair general" gives both capitalised and non capitalised results. A books search on "armchair general" gives 1,350 raw results with no immediately apparent reference to the magazine. In a general web search on "armchair general", the franchise gets top billing on the search results listing but these references tend to disappear in later search listing pages. GregKaye 14:50, 2 August 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 06:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose, per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Gulangyu (talk) 00:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Gulangyu as mentioned, the spelling is often "Armchair General" even when discussing the general subject and not the magazine. GregKaye 21:53, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * This ngram would suggest otherwise. Gulangyu (talk) 22:48, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Gulangyu I am really not sure how valid this is when each Ngram use of search term indicates "Search for "foo" yielded only one result" and only one search is displayed.
 * All I can see is that in the actual search on "an armchair general" you can see both capitalised and non capitalised results. GregKaye 02:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A web search doesn't establish anything. Here is the gbook raw data corresponding to the ngram above. I tinkered with the ngram some more and came up with a new chart. This one is based on more data points and therefore has greater statistical validity. Gulangyu (talk) 13:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Absolutely. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:19, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Support Capitalising the G looks like it's pretty common from the above, presumably since that makes sense for an archetype for some people, and because general is often capitalised. &mdash;innotata 15:44, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If that were true, someone would be writing about an "armchair General." But no one is. Gulangyu (talk) 05:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Gulangyu by your logic neither do people say that frodo is a hobbit GregKaye 20:38, 10 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

wording regarding new online content
Just checked the Armchair General website and there still new content being posted there. Posts about games (board games and electronic games) being posted in 2018, with a few other topics posted in 2017. Wondering what correct wording to add to article to indicate new content still being posted to website. --EarthFurst (talk) 07:42, 18 May 2018 (UTC)