Talk:Twister (game)

Original Research
The "Twister and Excorporation" appears to be original research so I am going to delete it. I am aware that other parts of this article are not perfectly cited, but this section looks like someone has taken the ideas of John Fiske and synthesised them with information about variations of twister. If someone can provide a reference to this section please restore it. Not Worth Waiting For (talk) 16:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced statements
There are some questionable things in the article, mostly in the history section; where are the sales figures, etc. coming from, and who exactly called the game "sex in a box"?

Anyone have ideas?--Crazysunshine 07:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * No idea. But why isn't the Weird Al song Twister mentioned in here? mike 19:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I know that there are quite a few questionable things in this article. My uncle is actually one of the inventors, so I have talked to him a bit about the TRUE story behind Twister.  This is where I got the story about his meeting with Mel Taft.  I hope to get more information so that this could be a reliable resource.  Reynolds Guyer has been claiming that he invented Twister for years now, and my uncle and Neil haven't gotten the credit they deserve.  I hope to help remedy that - even if it's only online. 66.168.28.168 14:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Dawn


 * It's also very much NPOV. I don't disbelieve you, but "my uncle said" is not a citable source.  I've therefore reduced the history section to the bare facts that can be determined from the patent, i.e. that Mssrs Foley and Rabens invented Twister.  If you want to restore the rest, particularly the sections making claims about Mr Guyver, then please be prepared to cite sources, or I will feel obliged to keep removing anything contentious and flag the section as libel if it persists.  Again, to be clear: I don't disbelieve you, but Wikipedia needs to cite claims, not make them.  Note carefully that what is required is an external source that makes those claims and which therefore accepts the liability for doing so.  If such a source doesn't exist, then you could create it yourself (accepting responsibility for the consequences), and then cite it.  What you can't do is to use Wikipedia as the primary source for making those claims. Rogerborg 10:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * The Guardian has an article with extensive quotes from Reyn Guyer and Mel Taft [here]. Mr Taft says that his sales manager said: "What you're trying to do there is put sex in a box". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.171.3.126 (talk) 05:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits
I appreciate the recent edits by the anonymous user at 66.168.28.168. The anecdote about the meeting with Mel Taft adds a lot to the article. However, unless we can find a published source, we may not be able to keep it in the article. WP:NOR says that we can't use information unless it is in a published source. Sorry. Heavy Metal Cellist talkcontribs

Recent edits
I will try to put up some published resources - I'm still new at this wikipedia thing - any help is appreciated! Thanks! 66.168.28.168 16:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)Dawn


 * Hey Dawn,
 * I met your uncle, Mr. Foley at his house in Charlotte. I actually showed him the twister Wikipedia entry for the first time. I started his wikipedia entry and I think it would be great if you could expand on it. Also, I'm the one who put in this information about the game being named Pretzel and then changed; I got this from Mr. Foley himself. How do we cite this?
 * User:oiuytre


 * "How do we cite this?" is a good question (I'm still new to this Wikipedia thing and trying to figure it out). In fact, I need to figure this out for my information about my uncle's first meeting with Mel Taft, since my uncle told me more of the details of the meeting than what is included in published information.  I do know that there was a newspaper article done on him (and his role in inventing Twister with Neil W. Rabens) in "The Charlotte Observer" (September 4, 1994) in the Living section (section E) that discussed about his life and Twister.  I have a copy of the paper and also a copy of the Twister patent along with numerous other forms of evidence that Charles F. Foley and Neil W. Rabens are the inventors of Twister.  66.168.28.168 23:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Dawn


 * Newspaper articles and patents can be sited because they are things that other people can consult and get the same source information. Val42 04:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dawn and oiuytre. I thought I would chime in here. As you may know I interviewd Chuck Foley, Neil Rabens and Reyn Guyer for my book Timeless Toys. In my time interviewing Reyn, I have never once heard himself say he was the only inventor of Twister. He has always given Neil and Chuck credit as co-inventors. On the other hand, when I interviewed Chuck, he was adamant to say that Reyn had nothing to do with the game. Yet, when I pressed him on it, he admitted that Reyn's game, King Footsie, was the original game where players act as the play pieces. He admitted that he and Neil were hired to take Reyn's idea farther. He told me he never made a dime on the game, and then back-tracked and admitted he received royalties for 3 years. I understand that Reyn made 99% of the money and how that would not sit well, but EVERYONE I talked to says King Footsie existed and it was the original mat game on vinyl with a grid wherein the people playing act as the play pieces. If that game does not exisit, if the Guyers don't hire Chuck and Neil and fund the how shooting match, then Twister never happens. It's that simple. An objective observer can not just clip Reyn out of the story as co-inventor. He had much to do with the creation and development of Twister and is truly the co-inventor along with Neil and Chuck.Timelesstim (talk) 02:43, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Photo
Couldn't we get a photo of people playing real twister or at least a photo of the box? ·:RedAugust 10:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've got the game, I might take a picture of it tonight. Would a photo of the box be considered fair use? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 12:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, need a new picture98.197.243.41 07:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

History expansion
Twister owes its success, according to The Playmakers, to Johnny Carson and Eva Gabor's playing it on the Tonight Show. See: here. I don't think the preceding website is appropriate for a citation and I don't have a copy of The Playmakers to get info/verify the quote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.98.161 (talk) 18:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I have made some additions, mostly to correct some inaccuracies. I am the author of the above referenced book, The Playmakers, which was renamed Timeless Toys and published by Andrews-McMeel in 2005. I tried to add that book as a reference, but was told that that is against Wikipedia's policies, because I am the author. My attempt was not one of self-promotion. I interviewed Chuck Foley before he died. I also interviewed Reyn Guyer, Neil Rabens, Don Dale, a former designer for Reynolds Guyer Agency and Pete Palony, the former art director for Reynolds Guyer Agency and they all confirm the existence of King Footsie. Reyn Guyer should have had his name on the patent along with Neil Rabens and Chuck Foley. All three men had a hand in its invention and if you take any one of them out of the equation, the game Twister never happens. All three men deserve credit as the inventors of this iconic game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timelesstim (talk • contribs) 19:55, 19 July 2014‎ (UTC)
 * Who is "Andrews-McMeel"? BMK (talk) 00:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * From its website it appears to be a newspaper syndicator and publisher of calendars, and only incidentally a book publisher. What kind of peer review or editorial review did you do when you were putting the book together for publication? BMK (talk) 00:28, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Other questions: who owns the copyright on the book, you or the publisher? Of the material which you added to the article (which I removed because it was not properly sourced), how much of it was verbatim from the book's text? BMK (talk) 00:30, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Andrews-McMeel is not a calendar company and a book publisher incidentally. http://andrewsmcmeel.com/our-company/about-amp. They publish ~300 books a year. My book was thoroughly researched and I have transcripts of interviews with the people directly involved, including everyone I previously mentioned. My sources are 2 interviews and 1 written correspondence directly with Chuck Foley, 2 interviews directly with Neil Rabens, 4 interviews with Reyn Guyer, 1 interview with Pete Palony, 1 interview with Don Dale and in addition, I have transcrips from 2 interviews with Mel Taft, former senior vice-president of reserach & development at Milton Bradley. I own the copyright to my book, as it was originally self-published as The Playmakers, and then republished by Andrews-McMeel in 2005 as Timeless Toys. None of what I added was verbatim, but I can and will add it back and make it verbatim if I am allowed to reference my book as a source.§Timelesstim (talk) 02:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Excuse me, please don't misrepresent the company, or assume that I am an idiot. I read the website thoroughly,and it's clear that publishing calendars and newspaper syndication is their primary business, not book publishing. No, you cannot put anything verbatim into a Wikipedia article -- except for short quotations -- whether or not you own the copyright, but a more serious problem is that it appears to me dubious that Andrews-McNeel can be considered to be a reliable source as we define it, especially since you self-published it first (we don't allow the use of self-published books except for extremely limited circumstances} and then A-Mc republished it.  This means that the book has had essentially no outside editorial supervision, no peer review, no fact checking, all are which is required to be considered a reliable source. In any event, you were apparently told before not to add material from your book to the article yourself, and I'm going to repeat that advice now.  Not only do you have a clear conflict of interest in regard to your book, but since you wrote it, and edited it, and published it yourself before it was republished by a publisher with an unknown reputation for accuracy, anything you add would be considered to be original research, which we do not allow.  You need to step back, and not add the material to the article again. BMK (talk) 02:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The fact that Andrews-McMeel publishes 300 books a year is the point. How many other things they do in their business model is irrelevant. They are a legitmate book publisher. That's all I was saying. Words like "misrepresent the company" and "idiot" are argumentative words and I don't want to be argumentative, but civil, per Wikipedia's policies. Andrews-McMeel's editors trust me as a toy and game historian. The book also had an outside, idependent editor before it was published. It is a trusted resource throughout the toy and game industry. Chronicle Books, who published my WHAM-O Super-Book, also trusts me as a toy historian. The bottom line is I spoke to all the parties involved and have the truth, which I'd like the article to reflect. How do I go about getting the truth into the article? Timelesstim (talk) 03:24, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:GREATWRONGS. Anyone who comes around here proposing to tell get "the truth" into articles doesn't have the right take on Wikipedia.  Please don't peddle your "truth" from your essentially self-pubished book any more, your edits will be reverted. BMK (talk) 04:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I think we got off on the wrong foot and I apologize for any part I had in that. I read the GREAT WRONGS and I see where you're coming from, and that's not what I'm doing. I used the wrong word in "truth" I should have use the word "accuracy." The irony here, is that the original article was an attempt to right a GREAT WRONG and get one side of the truth in print. It's innaccurate as it now stands. May I send someone from Wikipedia my book? I read that Wiki will accept self published books as references in rare instances. I took two years to research Timeless Toys and interviewed over 100 people for the very reason Wiki questions references. I want accuracy and I don't want to be sued. I stand by my research and so does my publisher. There is no libel here, just accuracy. I fact-checked the stories pertinent to this article by interviewing multiple sources. I don't believe everything any party says unless I can corroborate their story with someone else who was there, and that's what I've done. Let me know if I can send a book. It is far from your typical self-published. http://www.theplaymakers.com/Books.html Timelesstim (talk) 14:44, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
The rules section of this article was a direct copy of the source document. Infringing material has been removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

CV Unsure
I have tagged this for suspected copyright violation because part of the contribution made that day did infringe (see section immediately above this). Even if it did not infringe on the source documents, it was drawn directly from a website, here, as was the song from here (already removed). This leads me to some concern that other portions of text have also been copied, though I have not identified a source. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Subjective judgment
This language has no place in a neutral article: "Typically, people who exhibit high cultured tastes Encompass more diverse ideals..." This entire paragraph is original, specious, subjective, and largely irrelevant. I recommend deleting it entirely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.15.102.164 (talk) 15:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:58, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

In popular culture
Since someone's hell bent on keeping the "in popular culture" section, claiming that I'm "wholesale removing" it "against consensus", let's take a look.

Tell me which of those should be retained. None of them is in any way relevant — literally all of them are "This work had Twister in it". Furthermore, the citations for the few that are cited are horrible. One is cited to IMDb; one is cited to a mirror of the article on Encycl.Opentopia.com, and the rest are unsourced. Not a single one of these has any real-world bearing on the game. They're just one-off uses in fiction, no more.

WP:IPCEXAMPLES says: "When trying to decide if a pop culture reference is appropriate to an article, ask yourself the following: Has the subject acknowledged the existence of the reference? Have reliable sources that don't generally cover the subject pointed out the reference? Did any real-world event occur because of the reference?" I even said basically that to Beyond My Ken, and he still insists that I'm just removing the popular culture section to remove it. I actually did check each individual one, and none of them seemed to fit those criteria. Since they did not meet those criteria, they are nothing but trivia and should be removed. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:04, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:IPCEXAMPLES is neither policy, nor is it part of WP:MOS, it is an essay which has support primarily among those who prefer to delete popcult sections entirely (for which there is no consensus, nor MOS-based support) rather than discuss their proposed changes, simply because they are often able to get away with doing so. If TPH has objections to some of the entries in the popcult section, he should discuss them here, but not with a wave of the hand and a curt "they're all crap" dismissal.  I'm willing to work with anyone about these things, but I'm not willing to see popular culture sections being erased without consensus.TPH, you have started the necessary discussion, which is good, so please make your case.  I'll be glad to respond and work with you to cull the list. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:12, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, let's take a look at a few:
 * Twister is featured in Dexter's Laboratory: Ego Trip when Dexter's parents play it. Also Twister appears in an earlier episode, "Game for a Game", where Dexter and Dee-Dee play different games; however, to avoid copyright, the game was called "Knotty Bodies". Their rules are slightly different as some of the calls are unorthodox combinations such as "Right Nose Green".
 * Two episodes of a cartoon. One of which used a knockoff name and was an obvious parody. No real-world impact on the game. "To avoid copyright" is original research unless a source can be turned up to prove it, which I highly doubt since sources are often scant on cartoons.
 * In the "The Man Who Forget His Hand Was a Bomb" sketch from the Mad TV series, the man is playing Twister with a woman.
 * One-off sketch on a parody show. This was only one sketch, it never turned up again. Again, no real-world impact.
 * Twister is also seen in the film U Turn when crazy mechanic Darrell plays it alone.
 * One small scene of a film. Again, no real-world impact.
 * The title character in Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery plays the game with Vanessa Kensington.
 * Same as above.
 * Musician "Weird Al" Yankovic has a song "Twister" on his Even Worse album about the board game, done in a style parody of early Beastie Boys.
 * This one might be keepable, as it's verified in the Allmusic review. I don't know why I didn't think to check Allmusic the first time around.
 * R.E.M.'s song "Man on the Moon" features the lyrics "let's play Twister, let's play Risk".
 * A mere name-drop in a song. All they do is name the game and nothing else. This is about as relevant as the fact that, say, Kenny Chesney mentions Yoo-Hoo in "Summertime". Products are named all the time in songs, and they're generally not relevant. One exception that I can think of is "Take a Little Ride" by Jason Aldean, where the label forced him to change a lyric referencing a brand of beer because he'd signed an endorsement with a competitor.
 * In Season 1 Episode 4 of Friends, the main characters play Twister.
 * Not even mentioned on the Friends wiki, so apparently not a relevant scene to the plot.
 * The TV game show Family Game Night on The Hub uses the game "Twister Lights Out" – a combination of Twister and "Lights Out" – as one of their minigames.
 * Again, possibly salvageable. The point of Family Game Night is that it has adaptations of Hasbro game properties. I admit I accidentally skipped this one when going through them one-by-one.
 * In an episode of the Canadian television series Corner Gas, Brent has several fantasies about spending more time with his parents. In one fantasy, Brent imagines himself playing twister with them.
 * Just a cutaway dream sequence, not relevant to the plot.
 * The others are all variations on "This work has a scene where the characters play Twister". None of those by themselves seem relevant. None of them assert themselves as being relevant to the plot. If it were "The entire episode is about Twister", then maybe — but just having a short scene where the game is played is not, in and of itself, notable. The only ones I see that are relevant are the Weird Al song, because a secondary source confirms it, and the Family Game Night one because it's a derivative work made by Hasbro themselves. What's your case for the others? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:23, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The only "case" I have is that these changes need to be discussed and not deleted from the article on one editor's say-so. I'm just about to retire for the night after a long work day, so I'll put off specific comments until tomorrow, but just on a quick look at your reasoning, I see your point on a number of them (both keeps and deletes) and disagree about others - so I'm pretty sure we can come to some balanced understanding.  Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I agree with you that the mere mentions should go, so I'm going to be bold and remove them now (anyone who disagrees can restore and discuss). I'll then have comments on the remaining entries. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Now the remaining:
 * There's no doubt whatsoever that the Weird Al one is notable -- I don't see how our premiere pop music satirist writing a song about the subject of the article can't be notable.
 * Bill and Ted's Bogus Adventure - the playing of Twister is part of plot development, clearly notable.
 * REM - I'd be inclined to keep it, because it's more than just background as the mere mentions were, it's part of the "story" of the lyrics.
 * Honey and Clover would be OK, except it appears that "make his own version" and "way too many colors" are OR and/or POV
 * Family Game Night the use of the game as part of a TV game show is notable.
 * Britney Spears: see REM, also the connection of Spears to "Twister Dance".
 * So, I'm going to to delete the Honey and Clover entry, and remove the cleanup tag. I believe this to be a reasonable compromise betweem wholesale deletion and wholesale retention. (And editor who disagrees with my judgement is, of course, able to restore the entry.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep R.E.M., Spears, Al Yankovic, Bill and Ted, Family Game Night and Honey and Clover. Remove all the rest as mere mentions. --Cavarrone (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Al Yankovic, Family Game Night. -- Possibly Bill and Ted, if any RS has ever commented upon it specifically (not just in the "list of 3 games that they played to defeat Death" in a plot synopsis). -- Everything else can go. —Quiddity (talk) 19:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep R.E.M., Spears, Al Yankovic, Bill and Ted, Family Game Night and Honey and Clover. DavidK2 (talk) 02:01, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

- In Season 4 Episode 6 'Petarded' (4ACX09) of FOX animated sitcom 'Family Guy', there is a game night at the Griffin's where the characters play 'Twister' among other games. Does this info worths enough to be added? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.6.135.10 (talk) 09:08, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Injury statistics
There is no info in the article about injury statistics from people putting their bodies in awkward positions, but I seem to remember hearing some quite serious reports many years ago. So far the only online sources I've found are: And the first is clearly a copyvio summary of the second. That makes one source. It's a university website but clearly a personal anecdote page. Does anyone have some more serious sources? Boud (talk) 01:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * http://www.chacha.com/question/have-any-serious-injuries-occured-while-playing-the-game-twister "If you could witness all Twister injuries in hospitals you would be appalled. Pulled muscles, dehydration, and emotional stress."
 * http://www.mathematik.uni-bielefeld.de/~sillke/Twister/tournament/iceland.html "If you could witness the plethora of people with Twister injuries in hospital emergency rooms across the world you would be appalled. Studies have shown that 91.7 % of all Twister injuries occur at unsanctioned games (slumber parties, summer camp, etc.) At every sanctioned tournament a full medical team is always on hand to tend to the rash of injuries that inevitably occur. Pulled muscles, dehydration, and emotional trauma can have catastrophic results and sometimes be career ending if proper medical attention isn't received immediately."


 * I just realised that Torsten Sillke, the author of the Bielefeld article, is cited both as a source (one of the subpages of his Twister subsite) and as an external link. Also, the iceland.html article is clearly tongue-in-cheek. Common sense says that the real meaning is "injuries happen" and nothing in iceland.html should be interpreted literally.


 * So my question remains open. Boud (talk) 01:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Italicization?
My feeling is that Twister should not be italicized, in the same way that "chess" and "go" and "poker" would not be italicized. It may be a trademark, but it's not as if it's a video game title or computer game title, or a work with story elements associated with it. Thoughts? Robert K S (talk) 01:44, 1 March 2017 (UTC)