Talk:Snakes & Lattes

Problematic Sentence
I came here to expand this article, and the first thing I noticed after looking over what little is here so far is that the first sentence doesn't work - it doesn't seem like an accurate way of describing Snakes and Lattes. Snakes and Lattes is NOT a pair of board game cafes; it is one board game café that then opened a board game pub with a slightly different name. I think the easiest way to handle this is to remove mention of Snakes and Lagers from the first sentence and just mention it later on.

I don't want to make this major a change without giving people a chance to give input. Thoughts? Nwlaw63 (talk) 19:17, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Looking further, it appears Snakes and Lagers is now Snakes and Lattes College while the original is now Snakes and Lattes Annex. I'll edit the article to reflect the current reality. Nwlaw63 (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Help on the info box
Any help on the info box would be much appreciated - I'm not very good at them, and I didn't see any photos over at Wikicommons. A good image would really help here. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:30, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Game Count and using primary source
I have changed the game count at the café from the 1,500 given by a secondary source to 1,200 increasing to 3,000 as given by the café itself. While I would almost always prefer a secondary to a primary source, a primary source seems like it is best suited to describe its own inventory, particularly when the secondary source isn't as up to date - it looks like the 1,500 number was based on what the café had at that time. Let me know if there are any concerns here. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Relevance of prior tenant at Snakes and Lattes College Location
I reverted an edit that claimed that added who the prior tenant was at one of the Snakes and Lattes locations, and that was both unsourced and (in my opinion) irrelevant. The editor quickly reverted me again without discussion here. Do other editors see any relevance to this material, or have a source for it? Nwlaw63 (talk) 15:39, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * linklink 99.225.150.245 (talk) 07:58, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * That's a source, but it still seems basically irrelevant. Do other café/restaurant articles mention what business previously occupied the property they were on? Unless someone has an argument about why there might be some real relevance here I am going to revert this. Nwlaw63 (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * They certainly do. If there's a source, that is. Why would historical context suddenly become "basically irrelevant"? This is your POV. 99.225.150.245 (talk) 18:58, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As per Bold/Revert/Discuss, I opened a discussion here after being re-reverted - after waiting a month, and seeing no argument for the relevance of the material, I have reverted. Nwlaw63 (talk) 23:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Amfil Technologies
Thinking we should add something on the Amfil acquisition to the history section. Feel free to give any thoughts in what amount of coverage is warranted. Nwlaw63 (talk) 18:55, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. The Amfil acquisition seems to be relevant information with regard to S&L. Could link to a stub for the company as I don't see one here yet. TheConduqtor (talk) 00:55, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Snakes and Lattes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160913234551/https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160825/wrigleyville/could-chicago-finally-get-its-board-game-cafe-bonus-round-owners-hope-so to https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160825/wrigleyville/could-chicago-finally-get-its-board-game-cafe-bonus-round-owners-hope-so

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)