Talk:Wingspan (board game)

Let's stay away from unreliable or primary sources

Like many board game articles, I notice people adding content based on sources which are either primary sources or websites which wouldn't qualify as reliable secondary sources. I ask people refrain from doing this, and I may edit out content for which I can't find reliable secondary sourcing. Nwlaw63 (talk) 00:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

An article in Slate came out today: https://slate.com/culture/2021/08/wingspan-board-game-elizabeth-hargrave-review-profile.html I have not had a chance to read it yet. Slimy asparagus (talk) 09:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Importance

I can't believe this game is still rated as "low" on importance. It is higher ranked than evo ever was and has more mainstream press coverage. I am going to raise it and see if anyone call me on it.Slimy asparagus (talk) 11:23, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Oceania Player Mats

Actually the Oceania player mats are not unique. All players still get the same player mat. They are just different from the previous player mats. They are provide more options, have a space for nectar discards and are less conducive to egg spamming. I have not got a good source for this just yet. Our source for the Oceania expansion is not considered reliable but it just says "new player mat". Slimy asparagus (talk) 07:32, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Oceania wingspan player board.jpg (discussion)
• Wingpsan player board.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Rm of Image

I temporarily removed the image as it might not be directly related to the article and could be for decorative purposes only. Nevertheless, if there is more info on the birds selected, it could potentially be kept. Please discuss more here. VickKiang (talk) 04:45, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Wingspan (board game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: An anonymous username, not my real name (talk · contribs) 03:49, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I would love to review this. Already, I have to say, I'm very impressed with the sources used, and would not have expected most of them on a board game article. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 03:49, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

• The game was made by an American, but the article uses UK spelling. I don't see a need to change it, but I thought that might be worth pointing out.
• According to the lead, one to five people can play, but this is never mentioned in the body.
• The game also won numerous awards, including the 2019 Kennerspiel des Jahres for best connoisseur game of the year. I'm not sure it's appropriate to phrase it like this, as "best connoisseur game of the year" is a literal translation of the award name.
• Stuart West also praised the game's accessibility.[29] Similarly, Aaron Zimmerman from Ars Technica also praised the overall accessibility. This is rather redundant-sounding.
• A "swift-start promo pack" was also released in 2019, which added 10 new bird cards, intended for first time players. I can't listen to interview part of the cited source right now, but is this line supported there? I saw no mention of this in the text portion.

That's all I noticed. I did several spot checks that were all fine. Earwig found no copyvios. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 04:32, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

@An anonymous username, not my real name: I've addressed the following concerns:

• Thanks for your note.
• I removed the "one to five people" phrase the lead.
• The for best connoisseur game of the year part has been removed.
• Now it reads Stuart West and Aaron Zimmerman from Ars Technica also praised the game's accessibility.
• Changed the citation to the official website. It is non-independent but is probably fine per WP:ABOUTSELF, though if it's needed I can remove the mention of the swift-start promo pack completely.

I also expanded the lede. Thanks again for the review, any more issues? Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 05:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I think that's all. I will pass the article now. An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 06:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)