Talk:TetraVex

Available For
This article starts off with "TetraVex is a puzzle computer game, available for Windows and Linux systems." Obviously it is also available for Mac OS and several other systems. Web based versions (like ) should work on most modern browsers regardless of the OS being used. --82.171.70.54 (talk) 12:11, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

A simpler proof
On a $$n\times{}n$$ board, there are $$n(n-1)$$ horizontal and vertical pairs that must match, plus $$4n$$ numbers on the edges that can be chosen arbitrarily. Hence there are $$2n(n-1)+4n=2n(n+1)$$ choices of 10 digits, i.e. $$10^{2n(n+1)}$$ possible boards. Bomazi (talk) 08:38, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Copied to the article. Bomazi (talk) 07:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Blibbet logo
here's proof that the Blibbet exists : http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8470/8117114768_5f6a830fef.jpg

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on TetraVex. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for //delphi.about.com/od/gameprogramming/a/tetravex.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Please Restore
I came here following many links on simple games, but for this one was unusually redirected to some boring Microsoft release page which barely mentions the software title. The detail that was not salvaged when this page was deleted is not something I'd expect to be tossed away. TetraVex, which is also called MacMahon Squares, is a notable topic not covered on Wikipedia in enough detail. Here's a blog that agrees with me:

As to notability, here are a few additional sources independent to the ones already listed on the page:
 * 1) Edit: strike
 * 2)
 * 3) Edit: strike  and
 * 4)

DAVilla (talk) 22:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * For the record, the blog states:
 * There are hundreds of edge-matching puzzles, and Tetravex is an example of one based on the same shapes (although more than three colours are used).
 * Frustratingly little is said online about MacMahon squares – Wikipedia merely states that “MacMahon also did pioneering work in recreational mathematics and patented several successful puzzles”, alongside a lot of information about his military career.
 * Both links point to Wikipedia, the first to Tetravex and the second to Percy Alexander MacMahon. DAVilla (talk) 03:30, 10 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Oh goodness, they need to be published as well? Added a fourth one which I can't read. I'm not sure if the second exists anywhere nonvirtual, but that paper itself is cited here and here. That's got to count for something! DAVilla (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)


 * MacMahon Squares is not an alternative title for TetraVex. MacMahon Squares is a century-old mathematical puzzle; TetraVex is a video game which uses a variation on this puzzle. The very first blog you link to explains this very clearly, so I suggest that before you link to an article proclaiming that it supports your argument, read that article first.
 * None of the links you list seem to provide significant coverage. The two gamepuzzles.com ones don't even mention TetraVex, and the funtoyworld one is a copy-and-paste of the pre-redirect Wikipedia article.--Martin IIIa (talk) 16:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)


 * My friend, I'm not stupid. The language indicated that MacMahon Squares was a special case of TetraVex. But you are correct, they are not the same, because apart from that, the older puzzle allows rotation. Thank you for reviewing, I'm striking those examples. The other 2 still stand. Bullet 2 concerns no other topic, so how could it not provide significant coverage? Bullet 4 is weaker as it covers many such puzzles and may not be independent, but it does at least give it some mathematical treatment on page 251. And of course there's this paper cited in the deleted article. DAVilla (talk) 03:37, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Request withdrawn. I am expanding the article on edge-matching puzzle instead. DAVilla (talk) 04:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)