Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Archive 2019

BBC early 80's: Grand Slam
I created an article on these 3 tournaments (I was just re-reading the book on the first and gathered other bits and pieces). It's currently in my sandbox: permalink. I'd like to publish it, but (a) does anyone want to review it and categorize it? (b) I can't think of a sufficiently terse but unambiguous page title; something like Grand Slam (1980s broadcast bridge tournament)?

If it passes muster as an article (and I think it's a perfectly valid one), I'll undertake creation of links from other pages such as Pat Davies. David Brooks (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest Grand Slam (BBC radio) as the article title. Grand Slam (BBC broadcast) is an alternative. You will likely get other suggestions. Newwhist (talk) 17:08, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The tournaments were on TV, not on the radio! "Grand Slam: BBC TV" would work for me as a title. I remember watching the first two series, but the third one seems somehow to have passed me by or else to have been totally unmemorable. I have the book of the second series, and drew on it for the Wikipedia articles on Nicola Smith and Tony Priday (but I didn't mention htheir part in the first series, as I'd forgotten about it). David's draft article looks pretty good to me. I remember there was a very heated argument between Priday and Rodrigue in one programme, which I'm pretty sure was staged for the benefit of the cameras, as there's never been a better-behaved bridge player than Tony Priday. JH (talk page) 18:17, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I prefer Grand Slam (BBC TV) as a more standard way of providing a disambig in an article title (the bit before the parentheses should be the same as the article's "headword"). Thinking of which, I just added to the sandbox Italic title and a Short Description. I have two categories in the draft; hope they are OK. If no objections by tomorrow, I'll create the article with that title.


 * The Radio Times entry for the final of the regional says "...and the Pridays have a small tete-d-tete" [sic]; was that another staged argument? David Brooks (talk) 20:14, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It seems likely. Regarding the title, I must have had a brain-fade when I inserted the colon, and agree that parentheses are much better. JH (talk page) 07:16, 25 July 2019 (UTC)


 * One more clarification. The Radio Times (what a fantastic resource! I just discovered it while searching for citations) mentions 13 programmes, but there were 7 sessions according to JH's edit to Nicola Smith. Was that because most of the sessions were split into 2 episodes? David Brooks (talk) 17:29, 25 July 2019 (UTC)


 * That seems likely. The 7 sessions figure was taken from p7 of the book on the series. JH (talk page) 09:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Created, although I suddenly regretted the slightly generic disambig phrase when I realized there was a C4 series with the same title. Linked Pat Davies, and I'll link the other players in a little while. David Brooks (talk) 21:18, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Claudio Nunes
Someone (37.163.225.194) has edited Claudio Nunes entry and added 'Nunes has been wrongly accused of cheating at bridge by exchanging illegal information via card placement.' This is incorrect. He was found guilty by ACBL and banned. There is a subsequent paragraph about CAS. I am probably too close to the subject (I was an expert witness for the prosecution at CAS) to make the corrections.Nicolas.hammond (talk)
 * I have made some edits today. I suggest that this entitles you to make minor factual corrections and additions. Newwhist (talk) 16:30, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I corrected the tense of a paragraph but didn't make any other changes. I'll delete this section in a couple of weeks. "Favour" or "favor". English spelling because they are European? Nicolas.hammond (talk)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)