Talk:Minesweeper (video game)/Archive 2

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)

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

Being a programmer of an extended implementation (Crossmines, freeware), I'd like to see a new article for variant implementations. Section 1 would be a list of implementations, along with bullet-points of features that extend the gameplay relative to Minesweeper. As a second section, explain each common extended feature and how it affects game strategy, along with some well-thought-out screenshots (where copyright allows). There is opportunity for this to be a rich encyclopedic article, and I expect players who like Minesweeper would look to the new article to seek new experiences. Unfortunately, it would take some fair policing to ensure we avoid a free-for-all of self-promotion; I assume that's why the old links to variants were deleted (?) Comp-sci (talk) 19:00, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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

In 'Best Times' the statement that Dion Tiu holds the record for beginner, intermediate and expert is incorrect. He certainly holds the best expert time at 37.77 seconds however the world's best intermediate time is 10.00 held by Matt McGinley (Dion Tiu's best intermediate is 10.67) and although Dion Tiu does have a 'one second' beginner it is more accurately 1.70 while many other players do infact have 1.00 second beginner times. Check here for confirmation of world record times: http://www.minesweeper.info/worldranking.php Fildon 4:46am GMT, 11th of September 2007.

- a beginner highscore of 1.00s does simply not exist. all these times where achieved by 1-click-instant-win games. in the pro-minesweeping community it is commen sense that there is no real world record for time for beginner because in can never be 10% cleared how much luck was needed to get a 1s game... also matt mcginley does NOT have a score of 10.00 but simply a 10s. he got his score on winmine and therefore there are no decimals to his score. also jake warner's 9s score should not be mentioned because a) it is not the official world record and b) because kamil muranski has an 8 on int which is in fact the fastest time ever achieved on winmine but still is not the world record because the board was with a 3BV of 29 below the minimum 3BV of 30 an int board must have to be accepted to rankings (i know that some of you lazy wiki-addicts have no clue about 3BV and pro-sweeping - i know what i am talking about, i am among the 25 fastest minesweepers of all times) cheers and happy minesweeping - EWQMinesweeper —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.229.190.59 (talk) 23:42, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

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)

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)

The screenshots

The SCREENSHOTS,are taken from MinesweeperX 0.34 [1]. 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)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 13:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

They wasn't created with paint(apart the manual lines of the 3BVs).--88.82.46.193 15:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 15:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 15:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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[2].Also he claimed that he made them entirely(including the big 3BV of 59[3]) 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

“ To solve this issue once for all, I did by myself images that replace the original ones. The images that I did are not screenshots. They were made by me. ”

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

• 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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 18:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 19:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)

I'd happily do that myself. Still waiting to see if I get banned for 3 reverts, though, so... thanks for the offer! Sheffield Steel^talkers_stalkers 20:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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)

I'm on it. Give me a little while. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

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)

Great! You are good!! --Justanother 01:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)

No,reader aren't idiots,they are fucking morons.--4Minesweeper 00:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Insulting our readers is not helpful. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 02:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Again you understood half of what i said.--88.82.32.78 08:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Insulting our readers' partners isn't helpful either. Sheffield Steel^talkers_stalkers 13:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Now that's funny!! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 13:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

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[4]. 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.[5] 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)

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)

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)
• Disagree: this fits nicely in this article, and should not be expanded much further. +mt 18:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
• 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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 17:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

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)

• Partial Support I now think that the best thing to do with the KMines and GNOME implementations is to cut them loose and let them sink or swim on their own merits. After their removal from this article, there's no need to have a separate section for the Windows implementation, and any notable/meritable parts can be merged into the rest of the article. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 16:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

And why windows should stay?Either ,they all get out,either they all stay.The article is about the game in general,they are zillions of programs out there,even first year students can write a basic ascii 3D version of minesweeper.--4Minesweeper 22:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I did not say that the Windows section would stay. I said that any notable and meritable parts of that section would be refactored into the rest of the article. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 03:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The article is not about the windows version.The Christianity article isn't nested in the religion article.--4Minesweeper 07:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Logo

K Desktop Environment

A screenshot of KDE 3.5.7 showing the default desktop.
Developer(s)	The KDE Team
Stable release	3.5.7 / 2007-05-22
Operating system	Cross-platform
Type	Desktop environment
License	GNU General Public License and others
Website	http://www.kde.org/

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

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 04:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 23:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

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)

Advertising is not a good reason to include any image. Wikipedia is not: advertising precludes such additions. Sheffield Steel^talkers_stalkers 18:16, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

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)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 21:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

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)

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 Steel^talkers_stalkers 22:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

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)

SheffieldSteel, you can be practically sure that 4Minesweeper is in fact the banned IP and username you mentioned. His obsessiveness about leaving images and links of KDE-related software in this article, as well as his bad English writting (two different people would rarely make the same mistakes) are enough for me. Of course I have no proof of it, but his behavior is exactly the same of the banned Pixel guy. Some time ago, Pixel caused so much edit-war that I had to start a WP:RfC to solve the images discussion (by the way, he didn't respect the consensus achieved there and currently changed the images once more). Perhaps 4Minesweeper should be sincere and tell us by himself if he is Pixel or not. Now going back to the subject: all three infoboxes (original Minesweeper, Kmines and Gnomines) are unnecessary. They add nothing to this specific article, and instead, only make cheap advertisement, acting as a "place reserved to put images and links". And now just extending a bit on the subject: I also feel that the two galleries in the end of the article are "attracting" people who want to advertise their software. From time to time, users add new images there, frequently with links to external sites, but there is no need for that. Just take a look a the most recent example: Limdongwon77 registered to wikipedia only to update an image of (presumably) his own software, include advertisement in the image page, and insert his image (with an external link) in the article. The article about Minesweeper is not for propaganda of Kmines, Gnomines, Microsoft or any other software. It's about the game, just that. This abuse of images and logos (mainly by Pixel and in minor part by others) should stop. RodrigoCamargo 04:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for posting to add your opinion. I'm glad to see that it isn't only me that questions the inclusion of this material. 4Minesweeper is apparently unwilling or unable to answer the question of why these images should be in the article. Since I feel that they add nothing to the value of this article, I propose that these images and infoboxes be deleted from this page, and I invite other editors to voice an opinion - preferably with reference to some wikipedia principle or policy. Sheffield Steel^talkers_stalkers 12:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I already answered,this is just content.Content is not just text,it can be images,sound or videos.Wikipedia is not a dictionary.It's relevant and truthful information for thies sections.I didn't hear you complain that,some lump of text constitutes advertising.This is a new slippery slop,not only a subject have too be notable for inclusion,but also every single fact and detail too should be notable.I already proposed to split them out,but in the mean time all there stuff has to stay here.--4Minesweeper 19:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

You are quite correct about notability. Material that does not meet wikipedia's notability guidelines should not, in general, be part of any article. I can see no reason why KMines and GNOME should be given sections of this article on equal footing with the Windows implementation. I think that, based on their notability and on wikipedia's policy on undue weight, those versions deserve just a screenshot in the gallery. I'm not going to delete the content just yet though. I'm going to leave it up for a while so that, if any other editor thinks that either of those pieces of software is notable enough to deserve an article of its own, they can can go ahead and create one. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 04:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed from main article - to go into new articles

KDE

KMines

A game of KMines
Developer(s)	Nicolas Hadacek
Stable release	2.1.9 / 2004-08-05
Operating system	Unix-like
Type	Personal computer game
License	GNU General Public License
Website	kmines.sourceforge.net

KMines, in the official release, for KDE. Originally created in 1996 (latest release August 25, 2005 2.1.10) by Nicolas Hadacek under the GPL. See the homepage. It has three default sizes, "easy" (8×8), "normal" (16×16), "expert" (16×30) and custom levels. The custom levels can have dimensions from 5×5 to 50×50 squares. Possibility to play only with the keyboard. The colors, mouse buttons and tile sizes are configurable. Some cheating features are built in, a solver, an adviser and the "Magic reveal" mode (only for non-trivial cases). World-wide highscores are available on the official site.

GNOME

Mines

A game of Mines
Developer(s)	Gnome team
Operating system	Unix-like
Type	Personal computer game
License	GNU General Public License
Website	live.gnome.org/Mines

Mines (or gnomine), in the official release, for GNOME is licensed under the GPL as part of Gnome Games. The game's premise is that the player has to locate mines floating in an ocean.

Feel free to create articles to put this stuff into. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 17:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

Game analysis 3.1 Patterns and solving 3.1.1 1. Single square analysis 3.1.2 2. Double square analysis: 3.1.3 3. Shared mine analysis 3.1.4 4. Final analysis 3.2 Not always solvable without guessing 3.3 NP-completeness 3.4 Mine probabilities must be balanced against rewards 3.5 Measuring board difficulty 3.5.1 History of 3BV 3.5.2 Method 3.5.3 3BV/s

3.1 seems to be inherently unencyclopaedic. It's all original research and sounds like a game guide. 3.2 is somewhere between OR and blatantly obvious, as is 3.4. Itt looks like 3.5 is not OR, but it is still uncited. 3.3 is the only part of this whole section that has a source. Everything else needs to be sourced or to go. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 17:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mobilemines.cellufun.png

Image:Mobilemines.cellufun.png 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 04:37, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Minefield6D screenshot.png

Image:Minefield6D screenshot.png 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 07:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Minesweeper beos.png

Image:Minesweeper beos.png 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 07:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Some changes?

• The introduction is written for a person that is familiar with computers, the abstract game should be describet, and the computer implementation(s) should be mentioned under computer game.
• Is there someone that have images of the different squares? That way, we can create uniform field examples, without need of a graphics program.
• The strategy can be simplified, I will add/change the content and add pseudo-code for an AI soon.
• I believe it is worth to mention the Constraint satisfaction approach when solving Minesweeper.

Paxinum 11:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Started with changes

I have started to add examples like this, until someone have a better idea. A kind of template with a set of square images wourd be the best (see chess board system).

Example
${\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline \dagger &3&\dagger &\boxdot \\\hline a&b&\dagger &\boxdot \\\hline \boxdot &\boxdot &\boxdot &\boxdot \\\hline \end{array}}$	a and b is safe to open, because the 3 is already satisfied with 3 mines.

Is there anyone that can make this look like image boxes with image text? I believe it woeld be great. I intend to rewrite the double-square analysis with a Constraint satisfaction approach, which is a reasonable way to implement a minesweeper AI. Paxinum 15:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I know it might just sound like I'm being too demanding, but could we add colour to these diagrams? It really bothers me to see minesweeper in black and white. Fildon 01:35 (GMT!), 5th of November 2007 —Preceding comment was added at 01:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I personally think its all right. Nice work. 1yodsyo1 02:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1yodsyo1 (talk • contribs)

New images

Here are a set of minesweeper images that I have created, and

I have already replaced all the previous LaTeX tables. Paxinum (talk) 11:18, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Paxinum. Since you released them to public domain, I moved them to Commons so they will be available to all languages. --PaePae | Talk 02:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

New Link?

Would it be acceptable for me to add a link to my own JavaScript N-dimensional minesweeper game? I thought since it's on my own website it might be seen as self-promotion or spamming, but on the other hand it does seem like it might be significant to the subject, since I can't find any other N-D minesweeper games around. I don't want to just jump in and do it myself, so I'll just put the link here and if someone thinks it's add-worthy, they can add it.

http://www.geocities.com/xezlec/mindsweeper.html

There you go. It's actually a lot of fun for people as nerdy as me. :-) Xezlec (talk) 16:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Probability Analysis

In the probability analysis section it is stated that clicking on square d would give no useful information, as it would reveal square e... but wahat about the fact that a b and c are adjacent to it? At least depending on the variation of the game, useful information will be given about those squares. Wouldn't d therefore be the better move, as it is adjacent to more squares whose status is unknown, and give information about those squares, even cascadining into at least one of them (presumably b, as long as b is itself not trapped)? --Aradiel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aradiel (talk • contribs) 12:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

As we know that there are two mines in a,b,c, and d is aligned symmetrically to them, opening d will always show the same number, thus rendering it useless.

--These epic words were written by HTMLCODER.exe (talk) 00:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC

I noticed the following claim was made using crappy English and without either references or proof:

“If you have two adjacent numbers, the difference between those numbers is equal to the difference in the number of mines for the 3 squares adjacent to each that are not adjacent to the other number. For example: if these numbers differ by 3, all of the adjacent squares to the higher number not shared by the other are mines, and all the opposite ones are safe.”

It is quite a significant claim and potentially very useful so stating it formally:

              C2 - C1 = (mines adjacent to C1 not but adjacent C2) - (mines adjacent to C2 but not adjacent C1)
                      = C1 mines ∉ C2 mines - C2 mines ∉ C1 mines

Proof:

 Let 
          M1 = C1 mines ∉ C2 mines
          M2 = C2 mines ∉ C1 mines
          IM = C1 mines ∩ C2 mines
   
 Then
           C1 = #M1 + #IM
           C2 = #M2 + #IM

 Thus 

     C2 – C1 = (#M2 + #IM) - (#M1 + #IM)
             =  #M2  -  #M1
             = C1 mines ∉ C2 mines - C2 mines ∉ C1 mines

I have made no assumption about its nature. Therefore it is always true!

In the case of IM = ∅, although it is true, there is no information to be gained.

If you think the proof is up up to the quality standards, feel free to use it.

Irvine

Accessibility

The "game analysis" section of this article is using several compound-table images to illustrate particular gamestates, and it isn't explaining the relevance of them in text. These should be replaced with single screenshot images, and captioned appropriately. --McGeddon (talk) 12:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that doing exactly what you propose will not hurt the ability of someone to read the positions and therefore the accessibility to the article. However, I can agree that the images used may be barely readable. The question that arises is: Would the advocates of Free and Open Source software renounce to use the very readable single color and bolded digits, wich is standard in a lot of implementations, with the excuse it promotes Microsoft products? If the answer is yes, maybe someone should think about not using double click at all. It's patented by Microsoft. El imp (talk) 06:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Google Doodle version claim seems incorrect

It sounds like a wrong claim that in October 8 2010 there was a Google doodle for Minesweeper. The doodle search page for that date only shows [6] and [7], neither of which has anything to do with Minesweeper, and searching for 'Mines' or 'Minesweeper' gives no results at all. I think that claim can be removed. --pgimeno (talk) 19:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Removal of Critisism

The Critisism section had numerous problems 1.) The International Campaign to Ban Winmine is NOT a notable or well-known cause. The website does not even exist anymore, and most references on Google are to abbreviation sites. 2.) The blog post about changing the mines to flowers is only on the Wayback Machine now, meaning that the only one reference was by a blog/person that has been deleted from public internet. A notable cause would have an explosion of resources, and Microsoft would probably say something about it. 3.) The linked references do not say Ubisoft created the ICBW. The article states that only 696 computers have been demined. Being that Minesweeper comes with every operating system, it is statistically unacceptable to say that the ICBW is notable. Additoinally, it is highly improbable that Ubisoft would dedicate time and money to a relatively thin controversy.

As a result, controversy was nuked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.194.3.169 (talk) 22:23, 8 September 2014 (UTC)