Jump to content

Talk:Minesweeper (computer game)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 4Minesweeper (talk | contribs) at 22:37, 10 September 2007 (→Logo). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconComputing Redirect‑class
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
RedirectThis redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconVideo games Redirect‑class
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
RedirectThis redirect does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Restructuring the talk page. -FunnyMan 16:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for merge of Minesweeper Variants

All relevant info on mineseeper is alredy here,plus the variants article is more of a stub.--Pixel ;-) 21:30, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot discussion

Summarizing old discussions in the hopes of helping us find a concensus. Feel free to correct a section of the summary if you feel that it doesn't accuarely reflect the issue. Please keep further comments to the #Further discussion section. - FunnyMan 16:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I gave you ten days to pull this back in line on your own, but it just degenerated, so I'm stepping back in. The summary is not a place for discussion, treat it more like an article. If you feel something is wrong with the summary, fix it. Pro and con are separate for a reason, keep them separate. If you want to counter a Pro statement, file that under Con, and vice versa. And don't sign the summary, it's impersonal. Discussion goes under #Further discussion.

Summary

What screenshots should be used to illustrate this article?

Windows minesweeper screenshots

Pros:

  • Most well-known version of the game.
    • Screenshots will be easily recognizable.
    • Most readers won't use any other version

Cons:

  • Screenshot of non-free software, so would have to be used under fair use.
    • Fair use isn't desirable because:
      • Fair use laws vary from country to country.
      • This is a free encyclopedia, so free content is prefered. See the first item under WP:FAIR#Policy.
    • There are concerns as to whether fair use applies in this case.
  • Might not be in-line with WP:NPOV because it promotes Microsoft software.

KMines or other open-source software screenshots

Pros:

  • Screenshot of free software, clearly in line with the GFDL and copyright law.
  • Similar enough to the Windows variant to be recognizable.

Cons:

  • Less common version of the game.
    • Most readers will not have used this version.
    • The screenshots may be harder to recognize, despite similarities.
      • For instance, the numbers are colored completely differently.
  • Might not be in-line with WP:NPOV because it promotes open source software.

a note: color of the number in microsoft version is non-coincidentally( 1/8! ) that color in gwbasic ega palet, color(1)=blue, color(2)=green, color(3)=red... etc. this may not be glaringly obvious to people without msdos background... so if the colors allude to the ones in the microsoft version it may or may not be a coincidence and copyright worries arent quite as worrisome. Petetyj 23:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Custom images

RodrigoCamargo was kind enough to create a custom set of images for the article.

Pros:

  • Similar enough to the any major variant to be recognizable.
  • Released to public domain, clearly in line with the GFDL and copyright law.
    • PD images can be freely edited to make them more generic.
  • Clearly in-line with WP:NPOV because they don't directly favor any particular version of the software.

Cons:

  • The graphics will not match those of any minsweeper version. This may make them harder to recognize, despite the similarities.
  • The original images use the coloring from the windows version, which is unfair and needs to be fixed.

Further discussion

I've edited some of the below comments to help clarity. In the case of Pixel ;-), this is to even the playing field, as he has (by his own admission, though I've lost the link) a mental disability, which makes his written English at times nearly unreadable. In other cases, this is due to a change of context, as the comments were originally placed in the summary section above. All changes are marked, with a link to the original. -FunnyMan 05:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My own inclination would be to use the custom images for illustrating aspects of the rules and strategy (as they are version independant), an open-source one as the main article image (as a sample version that avoids the fair use issues), and images from each program for a section discussing it. Using the MS minesweeper image in that context is clearly fair use and in-line with WP:FAIR. -FunnyMan 16:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that simple. The "custom made" images only look like many variants because they look like windows version. One group argues that all the other variants are worthless, and so they shouldn't be mentioned at all here, only the windows version. They even wanted the kmines article to be deleted outright, without being merged in. I find this a bit extreme.--Pixel ;-) 21:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC) (edited for clarity, FunnyMan. Original)[reply]
I find that POV. The images are released to public domain, so we can tweak them to be more fair. How about making the numbers black & white, for a start? Looking at the archive again, I see that you actually proposed that at one point. Seems logical to me. The colors aren't really all that important (see below). Maybe we could use B&W for most of the image but colored numbers/fields to highlight areas of interest. -FunnyMan 05:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The KMines screenshots are hardly similar, due to the blatantly different colored numbers. 207.237.35.22 01:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Arjadre (edited for clarity after moving, FunnyMan. Original)[reply]

Guess what? The colors aren't really all that important. Their purpose is to aid in distinguishing one number from another while playing, while still being readable. People are used to seeing objects in different colors, they will recognize the overall structure of the image. Mind, I'm not fond of the KMines colors, they're not distinct enough. -FunnyMan 05:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's POV, I find the colours to be very important, in particular, the windows colours, which are mimicked by all the major clones anyway, with Kmines seemingly the only (barely) noticable exception.SchuBomb 15:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The KMines images are not IMC (International Minesweeper Committee) approved. (edited for clarity after moving, FunnyMan. Original)

And the custom images are? What this have to do with the issue? -- Pixel ;-) 15:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC) (edited for clarity after moving, FunnyMan. Original)[reply]
International Minesweeper Committee fails the Google test. When Google next scans this page, that name's occurance will go up by 50% internet wide (it was on two pages before, one of them their own, and the other a glossary from a site way below the radar). To me, this is a sign of a person or group of people who decided to adopt a fancy-sounding name and claim to be an authority. If they were actually important, it would be discussed in other places on the web. Therefore, I've pulled this out of the summary. You want it back, prove that there's a reason we should care at all what the so-called "International" Minesweeper Committee thinks. Fancy names don't lend any authority. -FunnyMan 05:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes they do. I suggest you visit http://www.metanoodle.com/minesweeper (The Authoritative Minesweeper) or http://www.planet-minesweeper.com (Planet Minesweeper) and ask what the IMC is. You'd be surprised. All of the record holders and the elite at this game have to follow by those standards to even be recognized. Also: you want a google test? Google "minesweeper". -- DB 01:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm...A group of (talented Minesweeper) users on a site following certain standards does not make those standards 'authoritative' in any way. The discussion is about making sure the images are suitable for GFDL, fair use, NPOV, etc... 40.0.40.10 18:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How can you say that the custom images are "Similar enough to the any major variant to be recognizable." and then that "The graphics will not match those of any minsweeper version. This may make them harder to recognize, despite the similarities."? And which variants are the "major variants", just the windows one? --Pixel ;-) 21:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC) (edited for clarity after move, FunnyMan. Original)[reply]

It's a tradeoff. The more an image looks generic, the less it looks like any specific version. As to the "major varients", I'm going by the images at the bottom of the article. They're different stylistically (colors, shading, font, flag/mine images), but the overall setup (grid, numbers, difference between 0 and unclicked, flags, mines) is the same in all of them, even the more exotic variants. -FunnyMan 05:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(in response to the custom images looking like the windows version) Oh, you mean the original version? The one that this article is BASED ON? DB (1-14-53) 05:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

First, the article should be neutral and discuss the game in general. The Windows version is the most popular variant, yes, but the Christian variant is the most popular variant of religion, and I don't see that article using Christian symbols to illustrate everything. In fact, I don't see any Christian symbols on that page at all. Second, the article doesn't seem to be certain which variant of Minesweeper is the original, it looks like it might have been a variant that ran on the Tektronix 4051, whatever system that was. -FunnyMan 05:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's flawed reasoning, christianity is the most popular variant of religion but only just, and perhaps if there were a religion with the demographic overwhelming dominance of windows minesweeper (95% as a conservative estimate, with the major clones (that have the same look as winmine) and the linux version taking up most of the rest, as opposed to 33% for christianity) there would be pictures with that religion displayed all throughout that article. I say either winmine images, or something close enough to the winmine look to closely resemble it (including the correct colours) but slightly different to avoid NPOV and copy write issues.SchuBomb 15:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as can be found on the archives of this talk page, I said I was going to give a break on the then-going discussion about the images I did. Considering that (1) many months passed since then; (2) the almost exclusively single Wikipedia user that didn't support that images, Pixel, has been blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia for strongly breaking its rules; and (3) during this time, a reasonable number of users expressed their approval for the images here on the talk page, then I put them back today. RodrigoCamargo 22:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction

Intro:

Minesweeper is a single-player computer game invented by Robert Donner in 1989.

History:

There was a version on a Tektronix 4051 around 1981, but the tradition of passing around a 'games tape' goes back to at least 1973 [1]. This tape even contains a 3D version of minesweeper. The author of this game, David Ahl [2] is a crucial figure in the early history of computer games.

So who really invented it, and when? Looks like a contradiction to me. -FunnyMan 05:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The Tektronix claim is the only one with citation... --anskas 22:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we sort out this contradiction? I will remove the Robert Donner claim in 24 hours unless some citation is provided. —anskas 21:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am an idiot. —anskas 02:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid further confusion: The contraciction has been resolved. -FunnyMan 04:42, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers?

Curious: could the squares with the numbers perhaps better be referred to by numerals instead of words? For example, Where there is a row of twos by a wall, four twos with ones at the ends means that the mines are beside the two middle twos, and beside the ones adjacent to the twos... being changed to Where there is a row of 2s by a wall, four 2s with 1s at the ends means that the mines are beside the two middle 2s, and beside the 1s adjacent to the 2s... Nyttend 18:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sounds good to me ... but im a newbie Petetyj 23:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Minesweeper Origin

I submitted the first version to use a windows-oriented user interface (SunWindows) to the old Usenet group comp.sources.games back in 1987; as a citation check out:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sources.games/browse_thread/thread/7c4b17a2c166a17d/7a7fb5ca34300444?lnk=st&q=xmines+Frank+Waters+Road&rnum=2&hl=en#7a7fb5ca34300444

I noticed some coworkers playing rlogic on a DOS machine in a neighboring cubicle; thought it looked like fun, so I wrote a version for Sun workstations (starting by carving up a network chess game I had written earlier, called nchess).

I don't know for sure, but I have reason to believe that the Microsoft game is probably inspired more by the game I wrote than by rlogic. The ability to flag squares as either verboten or as safe were from my original version of mines, which used various buttons (3-button mice on Suns, which stemmed from the old Smalltalk usage) for that purpose.

The original sources were ported to Macs and X windows. xmines still lives on, even though the old Mac and SunWindows versions have long gone into the bit bucket...

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.227.145.254 (talk • contribs) 04:49, October 17, 2006 (UTC).


Sorry; I believe I may have mistakenly edited a previous person's comment rather than creating a new one (haven't really paid much attention to wikipedia commentary before; please don't hurt me).

The missing link in the minesweeper debate - which is a bit surprising to see, really, after all these years, may be the mines program I wrote and submitted to the comp.sources.game Usenet newsgroup back in 1987. The genesis of mines was seeing some coworkers playing rlogic in a neighboring cubicle, then writing a minesweeper game for SunWindows immediately afterward. (Curiously, I have never played rlogic; I just watched them play for a couple of minutes.)

The original Usenet postings are apparently disappearing from the web, but still seem to be cached here and there. A google search for mines, plus my old home address (e.g., google search for "mines Frank Waters Road") is about the only proof of when the postings were made (though a pretty good one).

The game was pretty simple; the objective was to make it from the upper-left to lower-right corner in a fixed grid of 16x16 squares. A user could specify the number of mines in the entire grid; reachability was not guaranteed. A feature that was new to mines (not in rlogic as far as I know, though then again, I never actually played the game) was the ability to flag squares as known to be safe or as "known" to have a mine, making it harder to accidentally get blown up by poor mouse skills. The appearance of this same feature a couple years later in the Microsoft version has always made me suspect that they saw the mines version as well (yes, Microsoft did have Sun workstations in those days, I think; though only Robert Donner could really tell us whether this was where they got the idea!)

I have some really old screenshots printed out in a box somewhere... If I find any, I'll add some images to this commentary.

p.s. - as a citation, see:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sources.games/browse_thread/thread/7c4b17a2c166a17d/7a7fb5ca34300444?lnk=st&q=mines+%22Frank+Waters+Road%22&rnum=3&hl=en#7a7fb5ca34300444

not sure if all parts of the original shar (shell archive) are still squirreled away where google can see them, but I do still probably have the original sources somewhere (as if it really matters!)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wikitoma (talk • contribs) 05:16, October 17, 2006 (UTC).

Don't worry too much about putting comments in the wrong spot, that's easy to fix. Please do remember to sign and date your comments with something like --~~~~, as adding that back in is somewhat more annoying.
Please do try to find the images, that would make a great comparison shot for the article, especially since you're more than qualified to put them out under the GFDL for us. The source code is also interesting, and if you're comfortable with it, it'd be great to see you put that out on Wikisource as a historical document. Keep in mind that Wikisource is also under the GFDL, and you might want to consider allowing GPL as well, in case someone wants to use the code.
I'll make some changes to the article in just a moment to reflect the new information. Thank you very much for bringing this to us! -FunnyMan 05:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC) (Update: Done! Thanks again. -FunnyMan 06:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Im familliar with the punch boards, they are not related to minesweeper. punch boards you buy the board or some number of holes in the board to get a chance at winning a prize. bingo keno lotto.

A punchboard is a gambeling device with no way to preidct the Mine/prize/youlose locations.

a confederate or shill can know the location of the prize holes and can win often tomake sure the marks can pay their $1 to get a 1:100 chance to win $25 the board can be honest by appearance 99 of 100 holes can have the you lose notice with the code known only to the shill or the shill can play only with the rigged boards. the board salesman can sell the bord for $30 to the bar owner who sees the $70 profit and when a stranger comes to town a week later and gets the jackpot after trying 3 punches when the other regular coustomers have been paying their $ every day for a week .... these were typically 1000 holes with prizes of 5 10 25 50 and 100 so when a stranger wins the $ 100 and a different stranger wins the $50 and the regulars get the other lower prizes a lot more of the small prizes and generally a prize for the person who buys the last hole in case some smart mark gets the idea that all the prizes have been won.


mine sweeper is a logic stragety where game chance is only involved in the first click (microsoft version this is the second click) and there are some unresolvable posistions on edges and corners (chance but many boards can be salved with logic)


perhaps the expert board is harder because its a rectangle and has more edgetiles than a square, in addition to the increased numbers of mines.

Perhaps theres a punchboard article here this could go into? gambeling? mislabeled gaming by casino owners mislabeled as insurance by insurance companies and politicians

games involve stratgety or chance and have winners/losers in equal numbers.

gambeling, insurance appear to have chance or stragety but only the sponser of the "Game" can win. marks are called losers, suckers, coustmers, constituitants or investors.

Petetyj 05:51, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minesweeper Flags

Should the MSN game be mentioned? Jr W 11:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say so. I actually came to the discussion page to bring exactly that up!

Citations in Best Times Section

None of the best times are cited. I'm particularly concerned that Jaymin Berg is accused of falsifying screenshots without citation. If it's untrue, it's libellous. It also says "some ... have been known to falsify records by altering screenshots..." but Berg is the only name given; this is "weasel worded." I'm going to put an "unreferencedsect" on the whole section. DrGaellon 15:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The citation for the best times is in the linked (in that section) best-ever list. As for cheating information, I could attempt to get the people who receive the record submissions to make a page about that that can be referenced.SchuBomb 23:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's not at all clear. A proper Wikipedia citation should be entered to link that site - and that site is hardly definitive, since it's a self-organized group with no official authority. DrGaellon 03:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, you won't find a more definitive link right now, and second, that it has no official authority is also untrue, it is run by one of the members of the IMC (International Minesweeper Comittee), the organisation (elected by the community) that accepts or rejects scores.SchuBomb 08:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About my best times edit: the missing cititation in the article in the best times section the similutation could be true i never read it anywhere before is unclear if its 9x9 or 8x8

the results could be enterly true ie 1:1000 chance in a corner 1:5000 in the middle it all depends on how the program cheats after you click somewhere.

1) click somewhere in the middle pick a number from 0to8 as the number of surrounding mines generate the rest of the grid. 2) click somewhere generate a random grid dont allow a mine in the first square

the program works somewhere between those 2 since the results of the sim dont approach either. why anyone would simulate a cheating strategy to cheat a cheating program? I think a 10 sec time is good 1 sec isnt a time ... some of the other programs time to 1/10 sec. Petetyj 00:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two sections, only one needed

I renamed the "Linux implementations" section to "FOSS implementations" because GNOME and KDE also runs on other platforms. But now I notice that there is a section called "Variants". Why isn't this one big section? I think that information on other spcific ports that the Windows one is essential. By that I mean KMines, GNOME Mines, Winesweeper 3D. --Ysangkok 20:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Windows Minesweeper IS the popular varient. since its pretty clear D.Ahl wrote one of the origionals. before GUI. before CP/m Before MSdos. Perhaps any version that wont run on an IBM7090 with a TTY model 10 terminal is a varient. CRT terminals save a LOT of trees.

This is supposed to be an article on the game not on the platform or the color of the clues or the weeks fastest player(i could probably be that but im over 11 now) I agree or agree on one section holds all "THE GAME" now commonly called minesweeper.

Varients 2D hex tiles , grids constructed with no ambiguous clue patterns, torroidal grid , cylindrical grid, i saw one on a mac with square tiles and H, L and T shaped grids(a bummer more edges and corners)

Varients 3D cubical grid, tetrahedral grid

Petetyj 01:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double-square analysis

"five twos in the same setting means that all twos except the centermost two are beside mines."
This makes no sense - in a row of five, no two can be called the "centermost".
EDIT: Never mind; I've realised now that it means the centremost square labelled as "two". I think this might require clarification; possibly giving the values of squares numerical designations, as one user above suggested (e.g. "2" instead of "two")?
Branfish 09:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WRAPFIELD cheat?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CH-Kx2sl9c

Apparently theres a secret mode in minesweeper in which the field acts as a sphere transformed into a plane (essentially a Mercator projection of the field). I suck too much at minesweeper to have tested it out fully, but if this is true then mention should be made of it in the cheats section EunuchOmerta 01:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a joke video, ignore it. SchuBomb 02:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Damn. I'll leave this up for future referenceEunuchOmerta 17:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the WRAPFIELD feature isn't a cheat... it's more like an expansion, or an easter egg. Cheating usually grants the player with an unfair advantage in the game. Clearly, WRAPFIELD makes the game harder. BushMyster 23:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image

I've got this 167 x 259 pixel image of minesweeper running in xp. needed ? 122.162.62.248 10:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minesweeper on Windows Vista Business

I am disputing the statement that "The business version of Vista does not come with the game." I use Windows Vista Business 32-bit, and it comes with Minesweeper (as well as all the other Windows games). --131.215.166.206 22:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So under Control Panel -> Programs and Features -> Windows features, there is a check box for "Games", which expands to check boxes for each of the games. I do not remember if it was enabled when I first installed Vista; but whether or not it was initially enabled, the games definitely come with Vista Business. --131.215.166.206 22:33, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that, I just got a new vista business laptop and it has the games, they were not enabled when I first got it though. I will revise page --Benjamint444 11:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated anonymous edits

Since 01 May 2007, an anonymous user with IP 87.65.xxx.xxx or 87.64.xxx.xxx has been making edits on this page that strongly resemble that ones made by the old user named Pixel. Among the evidences observed on these edits that point in the direction of Pixel are: 1) usage of poor English, as well as unencyclopedic language; 2) attempts to fill the article with images of a specific software, instead of generic images, as discussed on this page; 3) attempts to "devaluate" the original version, as well as Windows, changing expressions like "comes free with Windows" by "comes bundled with Windows", or "popular Windows version" by "widespread Windows version", etc; 4) lots of unnecessary insertions of links to external pages about this specific software; 5) Lack of explanations about his changes on this discussion page. I say "old user" because Pixel is currently banned from editing Wikipedia, for strongly violating its rules. But it seems he is the one making obsessive edits, using sockpuppets. I am currently just reverting his changes. RodrigoCamargo 22:50, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's called playing politics.--Pixel ;-( 11:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, all those anonymous edits were really made by you, Pixel. Here in the duscussion page, you need to explain and discuss the reasons for your changes in the article. And not only make changes anonymously, without explanation. Moreover, there are some things I'd like to comment about your recent edits: (1) you put images for the KDE and GNOME sections that are duplicates, since they already exist in the galleries down in the article. No need for duplicate images in the same article; (2) you put unnecessary information about releases of these softwares, and also a list of "features" of one of them. Specific features like these are not suitable in an article about Minesweeper. Maybe in articles about these softwares, specifically; (3) the two galleries in the article are not supposed to grow indefinitely. Once they can illustrate well the examples they're meant to illustrate, there is no need to include more images. Overall, the galleries are not collections of images. I reverted all three edits. Remember to discuss your next edits, here. RodrigoCamargo 12:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You so rarely contribute,how do you know how is done?
  1. The gallery is for comparison,in the specific sections is for identification.You can add the windows image in the windows section if you want.
  2. In that case Windows version have to go too,in it's won article,i already proposed that,you turn it down.You want that only windows stays here and all the rest out.Either they all stay,either they all go out,pick one.
  3. Yes,yes let's discuss indefenetly.You are just trying to sensor everything that is not windows.
  4. For the image thing, i'm proposing to leave a mixture of both in,as a compromise,for example like it is now.Don't try having your way at 100%.
Pixel, we've already come to a consensus about most these things. The argument is over. Custom images are in (not wondows - custom). Everything else you try to do is just cluttering up the page.SchuBomb 14:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pixel, placing the same image twice in the same article is not good, and this is valid for all images, including the Windows version's image. All necessary images are already in the galleries, so there is really no need to put them again in the sections. Check here, where you should read "Similar types of images within an article often look appealing if they appear at the same pixel size", and here, where you should read "Articles may get ugly and difficult to read if there are too many images crammed onto a page with relatively little text".
Also, there is no need to create separate articles. I just said the specific information you wrote are not suitable in an article about Minesweeper. Just to make it clear, when I say "specific information", I refer to "(latest release August 25, 2005 2.1.10)" and "1.Easy, normal, expert and custom levels. 2.Keyboard-only game possible. 3.Configurable colors, mouse buttons and tile size. (...)". This kind of information should not be in an encyclopedia.
I didn't say discuss indefinitely, I said grow indefinitely. I said the galleries should not grow indefinitely, because, as their names say, they are just examples of the classic game and examples of variants. Just examples. Not a full collection of screenshots of many versions. The current number of examples is prety fair. No need to add more. So, I removed the unnecessary images.
And about your proposal to leave a mixture of both in, you should notice you already proposed that in the past, and the discussion is summarized at the top of this discussion page. And this topic was settled in favor of the generic images.
Just a final comment: using new accounts to evade blocks or bans results in the block or ban being extended. Just check this in your old, blocked, user page. RodrigoCamargo 15:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't do your homework.Wikilowering and politics.His was band so we don't talk to you.That's your only argument

I put my password on my talk page(warrant an automatic ban) in order to have my account blocked.If you believe you have a case to ban me ,go find an admin to block me.That's settled,basically you just want that all none windows stuff go away."This kind of information should not be in an encyclopedia.",what am i supposed to say to that?well it's sourced and relevant,if i begin saying that this and this "should not be in an encyclopedia",what are you going to say.For the images ,they are not the same pixel size ,and are put further a part from the gallery,their purpose is for the reader to make a quick comparison,theirs no ban on putting the same image like this in an article.For the "generic" that are not generic images,the issue is not closed and so i'm reverting to the version of January.--Pixel ;-( 16:07, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are editing unilaterally instead of discussing. I think you may be more interested in getting your way than actually having a discussion about it. Kmines is used by almost no-one, it does not deserve its own section at all, unless every other silly little version of minesweeper ever made gets its own section. It's ridiculous. The issue was closed ages ago. You are the only one making these changes, everyone else either isn't interested or disagrees with you. Reverted.SchuBomb 14:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KDE/gnome are covering 99% of FLOSS Desktop programs(not only linux,and not only on top of free software) so they do need a section.The galleries are not very long,and the requirements for wen an image is used two times are met.The images are POV.--Pixel ;-( 10:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pixel, Kmines and GNOME Mines are VERY unknown. For example, I have just searched Google images for the word "minesweeper" and not a single image of Kmines and GNOME Mines appeared in the first 10 pages of the results!!! Because of that, putting these images everywhere in the article is just ";;forcing" people to see images of an unkown version, which might be considered spam. Besides that, we have the generic equivalents, which do not represent ANY specific version. Ok, Kmines and GNOME mines deserve a section, and they are there, but please expand them writting something useful, instead of this: "(latest release August 25, 2005 2.1.10)" and "1.Easy, normal, expert and custom levels. 2.Keyboard-only game possible. 3.Configurable colors, mouse buttons and tile size. (...)". RodrigoCamargo 17:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By saying that they are generic you keep being intellectually dishonest,you know very well why you add them in the first place.Further more we could say that they are really screenshots.It's just POV.The sections are supposed to talk about the programs,it's what they do.For Winemine,it's not childish, he really said that.Ther no rule that forbids content simply because it's considered childish.Actually spam is information,just unwanted,the added information is factually accurate and relevant.The images in the gallery and in ther respective sections are used with different pixelization,far from the gallery and to illustrate the programs in question,the galleries is more for comparison.--Pixel ;-( 06:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sound option

I added a sentence about the sound option in Windows Minesweeper - this definitely used to work in Win 3.11, but I'm unsure about newer variants. Quite why the option to have sound enabled was removed by default, I have no idea! Stonejag 18:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comments: Screenshot discussion

This is a dispute about what images should be used to illustrate the article, as can be seen in the sections Screenshot Discussion and Repeated Anonymous Edits above.

Brief summary

(This is a summary, do not comment here. Please do it below, on Comments)

  • Until approximately August 2006, screenshots of the Microsoft version were used. Then, the editor Pixel replaced the images by screenshots of a less-known KDE version, KMines. This started a discussion, because some editors said the Microsoft version is more promptly recognized for readers as an illustration of the game Minesweeper than the less-used KMines. On the other side, Pixel replied saying KMines' images were copyright-free, while Microsoft's images were copyrighted. In an attempt to solve this issue, the editor RodrigoCamargo created new generic images by hand, which don't match any other version, and released to the public domain, replacing the images in the article. However, Pixel replaced back KMines' images, and since then, has been monitoring the article, making sure KMines' images are used. According to him, the generic images should not be used because its colors are extremely similar to the Microsoft version's colors. Moreover, he says that RodrigoCamargo made the new images with the sole purpose of being as close as possible to the Microsoft version. RodrigoCamargo (and others) replied saying that those colors are used by the vast majority of the Minesweeper implementations around, so it is not a problem to use the same colors on generic images. As a reply to this, Pixel says that this issue was already closed, and cites the fair use policy of Wikipedia. Pixel also says that having only one set of images is POV, not spam.
  • In the meanwhile, Pixel was indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia, for violating its rules. Because of that, it is not even certain if his most recent edits were "legal", since all of them were made using sock puppets. On the other hand, Pixel states that he pasted his password on the talk page of his user page in order to get blocked, for reasons of his own.
Statements by editors previously involved in dispute
Comments
  • I should comment on the fact that using screenshots of any specific software may, in some degree, be spam, made to promote that software, being it a free software or not. There are some evidences that Pixel is not simply trying to contribute to Wikipedia, but actually trying to promote KMines and KDE, by placing several images, links and references along the article. Examples include this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, and many other edits from him. Besides that, the current Minesweeper article has FOUR full-windowed images of the software KMines, one in each of the sections Game description, Measuring board difficulty, KDE and Examples of the classic game. I think this is enough to be considered spam by the majority of the editors. The generic images should be used instead, and the numerous unnecessary links should be removed. RodrigoCamargo 17:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia should also be NPOV.Camargo wants that only his images remane at the exclusion of all else.If this is not POV, then what is it?Even he ,he don't really beleave that the images are neutral,he made them explicitly so that they look like the windows version,he was promoting the microsoft images (as an ip),but wen it become clear that a policy wouldn't permit that,he made the new images as a replacement.--Pixel ;-( 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did not do the images specifically to look like the Windows version. I did the images to (1) put truly copyright-free images in the article (I released them to the public domain), and (2) resemble any version of minesweeper as much as possible. You say that the images I did are similar to the Windows version because of its colors. But the huge majority of the versions available for download use exactly this same set of colors (1=blue, 2=green, 3=red, etc). If I want to represent the huge majority of the versions in a single image, I should use the colors that the huge majority uses. This is also the reason why I made images without caption, smiley, timer, etc. These things make it very easy to identify the program being used. The minesweeper game is focused only in the board, so I made only the image of a board. RodrigoCamargo 13:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • (1)You realesed them in the PD because you erroneously thaut,that PD was superseding GFDL in the same way that GFDL supersede fair use in wikipedia.(2)POV "they don't look like windows version,they just look like the lookalike clones of windows version".--Pixel ;-( 03:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • (1) No, this is not true. I didn't think PD superseds GFDL. And I never thought that. I released that generic images to the PD because I'm not intereseted in keeping any copyright of them, and I want to allow anyone to use them for any purpose. Not because of the reason you said. Remember to assume good faith. (2) I can't understand what you meant to say, but I re-state: the second reason why I did the images is to resemble any version of minesweeper as much as possible.RodrigoCamargo 04:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You didn't resolved anything,the issue was already closed,just see fair use policy of wikipedia ,you made the new images with the sole purpose of being as close as possible to the windows version,not neutrality,the article had alredy images,you made them to replace them.I didn't say that they should not be used.You said that Kmines shouldn't be used at all.Having only one set of images is POV, not spam.--Pixel ;-( 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your so full of shit,this are screenshots of your program.If you realy created them by hand,then i'm Budha.You didn't resolved anything,the issue was already closed,just see fair use policy of wikipedia ,you made the new images with the sole purpose of being as close as possible to the windows version,not neutrality.You argument of neutrality is really dishonest.If with this you don't take us for idiots,then what is it?I didn't say that they should not be used.You said that Kmines shouldn't be used at all.Having only one set of images is POV, not spam.--Pixel ;-( 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • From my block log "with an expiry time of indefinite (compromised account; password was pasted on userpage)".I pasted my password on my talk page so that it gets blocked.I don't want to contribute to Wikipedia any more,but since you proved to be intellectually dishonest,i'm making a small exception.By keep returning to this technicality,you just show that you are not honest and just wikilowering.--Pixel ;-( 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pasting you password is a strong violation of Wikipedia's rules. Strong enough to end in an indefinite ban. Explaining what you did to get blocked does not attenuate your violation. I am citing this fact because probably most of your recent edits (still in the screenshots discussion) can be considered "illegal", because most of them were made using sock puppets, and using new accounts to evade blocks or bans is not allowed. RodrigoCamargo 13:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The images are actually screenshots.Very probably Camargos program [1],it has two interesting features,"Has three built-in skins."since he is the programmer it's a pice of cake to put in any skin he want(i didn't try very hard to see were the filles were located).And "Ability to edit the postitions of the mines manually, on Cheat mode.".THIS is a conflict of interest.Then he just used paint for the 3BV.--Pixel ;-( 05:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, the images are NOT screenshots, as you affirm. I did the generic images by hand, using the Paint program. Check the font used, it's just a slightly modified version of Fixedsys and MS Sans Serif. And the images are not screenshots of my program. Check here[2], here[3] and here[4] the only 3 skins available on it, and see that none of them match the one I did for the article. The information "Ability to edit..." is not written in the article. It's on my program's website. By the way, there is not a single screenshot or link of my program in the entire article about minesweeper. And this is how it should be. Wikipedia is not to promote software. RodrigoCamargo 13:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mean that you have the source code of a mine sweeper game,that you wrote your self.And didn't past thrue your mind to just replace/edit the data filles,recompile,use the cheat mode and then have a screenshot?Ok explain how exactly you did them with paint?--Pixel ;-( 03:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I have the source code of a minesweeper game that I wrote for myself. No, it didn't pass on my mind to replace data/recompile/use cheat mode/take a screenshot. Explaining how I did the screenshots on Paint: zoomed in on a blank image; did a grey 16x16 pixels square with black border; copy-pasted it several times; used the text tool to put colored numbers, letters and question marks on the squares; used the pencil tool to draw blocks, flags, and final edits; arraged several copies of the squares in grids, making the images of the boards; saved each image separately. RodrigoCamargo 04:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, by hand. I didn't say it was easy. So, (1) I hope you understood that your first affirmation, "The images are actually screenshots. Very probably Camargo's program", is a false affirmation. (2) I also hope you understood your second affirmation, "it has two interesting features, has 3 built-in skins (...) and ability to edit the positions of the mines manually. THIS is a conflict of interest" is also a false affirmation. RodrigoCamargo 11:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "History of 3BV".We can learn some things about my friend Camargo "In 2004, Rodrigo Silveira Camargo published "Minesweeper Clone" with many 3BV-related features.... ".Thats COI.--Pixel ;-( 05:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think there were several other programs with 3BV-related features beforehand, that might be a problem.--User:Ieeedarn
  • Of course there were programs with 3BV features before. The article itself cites the program "Minesweeper Board Reader", as well as Sorin Manea's program. There is no problem with that. RodrigoCamargo 11:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Until someone agrees with Pixel, I'm going to automatically revert every custom image he tries to replace with a kmines image, no-one agrees with him and he's acting unilaterally. Hope no-one has a problem with that. I support RodrigoCamargo's position completely.SchuBomb 15:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • SchuBomb is not trying to start a votation. So, no need to emphasize the non-democratic nature of Wikipedia, which, instead, assumes that we should find a consensus, and not act unilaterally. RodrigoCamargo 04:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems that we have a consensus, and one editor who apparently is not willing to abide by that consensus. Pixel, you have failed to assume good faith and have made personal attacks on this Talk page (e.g. "Your so full of shit" above). In addition, you have engaged in edit warring over screenshots of your own software when the conflict of interest guidelines advise you to exercise extra caution and seek consensus before making changes. Please read the guidelines linked in this post - and try to follow them. This will help us all to work together to make this a better article. SheffieldSteel 17:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In an ideal world, screenshots from many different versions would be ideal. But this is not an ideal world, and the Windows version is the default version for the vast majority of users. Anything else is a clone, and really not appropriate for a primary screen shot, only as an example of a different version. I support open source software, but I do not support Pixel's actions. Haikupoet 04:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Implementations

Does a section about other implementations make sense (I'm talking mainly about kmines and gnomines). Since anything other than windows minesweeper has a relatively small amount of players, one has to assume that all major clones of minesweeper would have to be allowed to have its own section: minesweeper clone and minesweeper arbiter are quite major, as well as some mac clones, Dangerous mines, crazy minesweeper, Narkomania, the firefox extension game of minesweeper, and that's not even to mention the online versions.

Maybe a better idea is have the main version (windows) prominent, and perhaps have a page for minesweeper clones.SchuBomb 15:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that this article is actually more then one article in one.--Pixel ;-( 02:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear text

This last para of 'Cheats' is unclear.

Also, in the windows version, by using the above xyzzy and right clicking on all of the mines before ever left clicking allows the player to locate and flag all of the mines without the timer starting. Once the player has flagged all of the mines, he or she simply has to clear the rest of the board by left clicking.

How can the player right-click on 'all of the mines' ?

Arnavion 21:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

using the microsoft cheat as you move the curser over a tile then observe the pixel on the upper left to see if that tile has a mine or not.

as soon as all the mines are marked(right click ) all the tiles are lifted all the clues are revealed and a left click is not needed.

this cheat is somewhat akin to taking apart a rubick cube to sort the colors and reassemble it correctly, it takes far longer to use the cheat than to just do the puzzle. once you solve it a few times youll be far faster than the cheat.

Petetyj 04:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Best Times

I've removed the following from Best Times, imho it's not enciplopedic and badly written.

Some Notes On Speed.

The versions other than windows sometimes allow you to lift a tile [on mouse down] rather than [on click]. which allows much faster times on equivalent puzzles. if you get a logitek(tm) mouse you get a copy of mouseware(tm) that can approach this level of control and speed.

If you are trying for speed NEVER mark mines. They are marked automaticly when all the tiles without mines are lifted. It wastes time. Marking helps while learning the patterns.

In real life the fastest way to clear a minefield is a cluster bomb, but only if multimegaton nuclear bombs are outlawed.(This may not be the object of the game either.) 78.12.110.15 09:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

on all those speed record sites... the whole idea of speed records is entirely based on the windows game.

the windows implementation is based "on click" ie mouse down then mouse up on the target tile. its very bad if you are trying to click quickly.

perhaps it would be better to hold the button down then release when you reach the correct spot.

other platforms/programs use "on mouse down" which allows you to click faster.(hit the button when you are over the spot). perhaps the mouse trails would make this clear.. and even slower. i get far better times with other implementations and equivalent grid sizes. I have far more experience with windows than anything else. I have trouble double clicking (repeatably reliably) with windows. the apple has one button ... and i never seem to have a problem. mouseware allows you to use the third button to double click. and makes the rest almost as good as the apple.


This part is clear:

"If you are trying for speed NEVER mark mines. They are marked automaticly when all the tiles without mines are lifted. It wastes time. Marking helps while learning the patterns. "

and should probably remain...


I edited some other parts that dissappeared... this part i have an idea why. thanks 78...etc


Petetyj

Fair use rationale for Image:Mindsweeper.jpg

Image:Mindsweeper.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 this Wikipedia article 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. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is 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.

BetacommandBot 05:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History

The history section is not particularly good. As the intro hints at, the only real reason why minisweeper is so famous is because of it's inclusion in Windows. But the history section doesn't even go into when it was included in Windows! Nil Einne 23:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The screenshots

The SCREENSHOTS,are taken from MinesweeperX 0.34 [5]. So,i'm reverting back to the kmines mix.If you don't like it ,every body can use the above programme to produce replacements that are mutually acceptable.It even works with wine.--88.82.46.193 08:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't. This has been discussed ad nauseam and resulted in plenty of edit warring. The screenshots that should be used are the ones created using MS Paint. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 13:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They wasn't created with paint(apart the manual lines of the 3BVs).--88.82.46.193 15:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you prove that the "generic" images are in fact screenshots? If not, there is still some doubt in the matter. By contrast, there is no doubt whatsoever that the KMines images are screenshots. Therefore, there is no reason to switch to the KMines images. And that's assuming that "screenshots are bad" is a more important consideration than "inconsistent images are bad". Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 15:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that the images now say they are screenshots... because you just changed their descriptions! Do you have any justification for making this assertion, and changing the image creator's description of the files? Or were you simply unaware that your every contribution is a matter of permanent record? Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 15:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First question,is it up to me to prouve that are screenshots,or up to camargo to prouve that they are not? He was aware of the programme existence before he posted his images here.You can tell because he posted his skins[6].Also he claimed that he made them entirely(including the big 3BV of 59[7]) by hand (with paint)and that "This image is not a screenshot of any program",do you beleave that?If you compare his skins that he posted with the "images",they basacly have a cople of pixels of diference.Someware up in this page he sais that,the images numbers are "a slightly modified version of Fixedsys and MS Sans Serif",why did he do that?Why go the trouble of removing or adding pixels?I can't check but the skins that he posted are they "Fixedsys and MS Sans Serif"?The 1 and 3(the numbers) are basecly his skin numbers minus the fusy part.And why are they exacly the same size?The colors seems identical,are they exactly the same (i mean,by checking the code)?And why he didn't tell us about the program?Also,are thies screenshots copyright violations?

Camargo

--88.82.46.193 17:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • You have not provided any reason why the KMines images should be used to illustrate the article.
  • You have not explained why you changed the comments made by the editor who uploaded the generic images.
  • You have engaged in an edit war in the article.

I believe that you are User:Pixel ;-( 123 who is a reincarnation of indef-blockedUser:Pixel ;-) and that you have a conflict of interest as discussed earlier on this page (e.g. the RfC on these screenshots that went against your wishes). I strongly suggest that you obtain and use a login - if for no other reason than to hide your real name and address from WHOIS searches. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 18:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The first question,implies,why should all the burden of prouf be on me.What if you took the "evidence" i razed one by one.The images are not generic.And camargo is lying.--88.82.46.193 19:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if, as you say, "camargo is lying", all that means is that the generic-looking images he has uploaded are modified screenshots... and according to your link, they are taken from a program which is freely downloadable and whose web page does not contain any copyright information (other than what's required for the Microsoft Windows version). This is all a very long way from saying, "this article must use the KMines images - and it's so important that I am going to edit war about it - and edit the comments above another editor's username so that it looks like he claimed to have made the images himself and later retracted that claim and said they were screenshots - and edit war on the image pages too when someone restores the image uploader's original comment."
If you can fill in the logical gaps here, I am prepared to listen. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 19:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you see evil in everything other do?It's extrimly difficult to discuss any thing with you,your over extrapolations are beyond my logic.What about "good faith",thing?Did i ever impersonate anyone?Thats why i put the Strike-through text.I'll sing my edits,so that you are happy.That the program is freely downloadable don't mean anything,because ther's no copyright information,it don't mean that it's PD.The default is copyrighted.--88.82.46.193 20:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


What is someone (me if you like) made some non screen shot images and uploaded them as svgs. Would that solve the problem? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd happily do that myself. Still waiting to see if I get banned for 3 reverts, though, so... thanks for the offer! Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 20:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Banning me is absurd.But i wouldn't be suprized.Do them in black and white.That way,no more arguments,and i will be happy.Like i said before,but you didn't listen,i don't care about the kmines screenshots.Also an svg should definetly satisfy me.--88.82.46.193 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.82.32.78 (talk) 20:26, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

I saw this on the AN/I board and jumped in. The generic images are clearly preferable. However, if the IP can prove that whoever made them did not label them in good faith (for instance if they are pixel for pixel identical to the MinesweeperX 0.34) then another solution is needed and making new images would certainly be the best solution. In either case the IP should not edit war over it but work it out here in talk. --Justanother 20:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it. Give me a little while. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I deliberately made them look nothing like any minesweeper game I've seen but as they are SVGs you can edit the colours, fonts, etc to your hearts content. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great! You are good!! --Justanother 01:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Oh geez, not again. I'm sure we agreed that they should be generic images, but also that they should be the same colours as windows minesweeper (because so many other programs copied those colours, and therefore it would not just be the same colours as windows, but many other versions as well). What Rodrigo made has no problems, it's exactly what we need! SchuBomb 04:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why it has to be the same colours as the windows game. Readers are not idiots, but feel free to edit. Certainly these files should be SVGs anyway. Most diagrams need to be in a SVG format and there is a concerted effort among the graphics people to convert all pngs to svg. Feel free to edit the colours if you don't like them. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No,reader aren't idiots,they are fucking morons.--4Minesweeper 00:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Insulting our readers is not helpful. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 02:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again you understood half of what i said.--88.82.32.78 08:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Insulting our readers' partners isn't helpful either. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 13:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now that's funny!! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I do appreciate Theresa's well-intentioned efforts, and I don't think she should be criticised for not reading the entire archives before offering to help out. Now, as I understand the (historical) consensus on this matter, the illustrations should be (1) consistent (2) clear and easy-to-read (3) GFDL compatible (4) neutral, i.e. not showing bias towards any particular product. I see no great difficulty with moving in that direction from where we are now. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 13:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think I should join in this discussion (again). I see the IP 88.82.xxx.xxx (which I will assume here as being User:Pixel ;-) writting clearly that I lie. He did it here in this discussion page, as well as on AN/I. Pixel means that I did not do the generic images by hand. He means that I took a screenshot from another program and lied saying I did by hand. This is false. I really did the images by hand. Pixel strongly doubts that I did these images by hand, and it seems that he finds it impossible for everyone to make such moderately complex images by hand[8]. One clear example that it is perfectly possible for everyone to make such images by hand is the fact that User:Theresa_knott did similar images, appearantly without many difficulties. Also, his edits directly on the images' pages are shameful. He stated, undoubtfully that the images are screenshots of a given program, and did this without proof.[9] I say it again: these images were made by hand, by myself. Concerning the SVG images, in the past, I already did SVG equivalents of the generic images that I did. However, I found two main problems: 1) the SVG files were 80+ kilobytes long, against the sometimes <1 kilobyte PNG files; 2) in this specific case, when displayed in the form of thumbnails in the article, the SVGs show too much antialiasing, disturbing a little bit its sharpness, while PNG files are edited pixel by pixel, remaining clear. Said so, even though I think in this case PNGs give more advantage, if the consensus found is that SVG should be used, I can re-make the generic images in this format. Hopefully this will prove definitely to Pixel that yes - it is possible to make such images by hand. RodrigoCamargo 15:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I prefer svg images is that they are very easily editable, which makes them more wiki friendly. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Split Implementations

  • Agree (tager)The article is realy 4 articles.The 3 implementations should be split out in their won articles,or merged with adequate articles.The specific implamentaions have little to do with the main article.Not in that extent anyway.--4Minesweeper 00:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disagree: this fits nicely in this article, and should not be expanded much further. +mt 18:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disagree If the article was at Good or FA level, and was too long, and we were having difficulty deciding which parts to cut out, I'd be in favour of splitting the this up. But as it stands, there is barely enough notable, verifiable, encyclopaedic material to fill one article. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 17:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Articles shouldn't be grouped in big ones,just because they are small or stubs.An article can very well be small.I proposed that the sections should either be merged with relevant articles,or split in too articles.--4Minesweeper 23:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
K Desktop Environment
Developer(s)The KDE Team
Stable release
3.5.7 / 2007-05-22
Operating systemCross-platform
TypeDesktop environment
LicenseGNU General Public License and others
Websitehttp://www.kde.org/

An example among many,a screenshot and a logo.--4Minesweeper 23:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're going to add icons to every other piece of software mentioned on the page. Otherwise, the additions of icons to selected software violates neutrality policy - and creates the appearance of conflict of interest on your part. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 04:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the logos because I cannot see what purpose they serve other than to advertise the non-Windows-platform versions of Minesweeper. Before adding logos into the text (which may lead to an edit war and perhaps a ban) again, please provide a reason for including them. Good arguments might be based on WP:MOS or Wikipedia:Choosing_appropriate_illustrations. Bad arguments can be found here. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 23:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what reason people put logos in articles?For what reason this is an add and the others are what ever they are supposed to be.--4Minesweeper 04:18, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Advertising is not a good reason to include any image. Wikipedia is not: advertising precludes such additions. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 18:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not addvertising.Why don't you remove the great seal from the infobox of USA article?Or the KDE logo from KDE article?--4Minesweeper 21:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then, back to my previous question. Why add icons? What do they add to this article, other than byte count? What illustrative purpose do they serve? Also, why add icons to the KMines and Gnome implementations, and not to the Windows version? Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 21:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the windows version .... i don't have it.And i'm not aware that it has any kind of logo.The windows version is a bundle of a presumably "test" or "not important" programme,or something like that,for windows.The other two are projects on their won."Why add icons?",this is double standards,a zillion icons in wikipedia,don't serve any kind of purpose,i beleave that consensus is quite clear on the issue.Why keep the great seal in the USA article?--4Minesweeper 21:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why keep the great seal in the USA article? Well, perhaps because it illustrates something notable. As I said above, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is a bad argument for keeping anything.
The more you fight to keep icons on just two pieces of software - without any counter-argument to the WP:NPOV argument that all three should be represented similarly - the more you look like a sockpuppet of a certain banned IP and username, both of which edit-warred on this article despite having a WP:COI on the subject. Sheffield Steeltalkersstalkers 22:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please be my geast,you can add the windows minesweeper logo.I am not aware that there is one.Are you saying that since there isn't one the others should be removed?--4Minesweeper 22:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Minesweeper_(computer_game)&oldid=157026129"