Talk:Mahjong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

[edit] Move

I moved the article from Mah Jong to Mahjong. The later spelling is 10 times more popular: 45,500 vs 488,000 [2]. --Menchi 01:28, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Scoring table

Here's a job for someone with too much time on their hands: wikify the doubles table into something like this. The linked page even has the Chinese names, but unfortunately, they're all graphics... Jpatokal 09:13, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] To Do

add info about riichi
add information about quints and alternate flower tile/melding rules in American (NMJL) Mahjong (eg. it's possible to declare melds of flower tiles, but not possible to "add" to an existing meld) - I tell you, those NMJL rules are very different from more conventional rules
add more specific info about scoring (the HK and Japanese systems in particular)
perhaps split articles (as it is approaching 32K, and perhaps as a convienient way of linking MJ to other games with MJ-tiles like 10 1/2)
simplified and traditional characters...?
generic tile pictures, anyone?

kelvSYC 06:38, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Failed FAC Nomination

A self-nomination, but I think the content is largely adequate, and changes made during the nomination process will cement its position among Wikipedia's elite articles. kelvSYC 20:31, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Support, though the navigation could be improved; I'm just not sure how. It's a lot of information, after all. --Golbez 21:15, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
Object. A brief scan reveals several problems, notably a lack of (or just sporadic) information on the Japanese game. I fixed the first section, but don't have time to address the other problems today, or probably for a couple of days. Also, the article is currently 53kb. Exploding Boy 21:48, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
- The TOC is also overwhelming and should be cut down. →Raul654 07:17, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
- I have to admit that there is not enough depth in the scoring section (and it may need to be rewritten once again), but can you give us more detail as to what these problems you refer to are? kelvSYC 07:06, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Comment: If the length of the article is a concern, what can us Wikipedians do to improve upon it? We could split the Mahjong article into something like American Mahjong for stuff specifically relating to American mahjong (eg. quints, Charleston, scoring card, etc.) and do similar things for other major variations. kelvSYC 07:06, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- The typical (and more aesteically pleasing, and less time consuming) method is to take one of the longer sections and fork it off into its own article, and leave a 1-2 paragraph summary in its place. →Raul654 07:20, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
  - I've chopped off the scoring section and put that into Scoring in Mahjong. When more details are added, probably each type of scoring can have its own article. However there seems to be an imbalance of information in Mahjong which is currently 27kb. I'm not sure which other section in the main article to chop off. —Goh wz 01:32, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    - The article length and TOC are fine now. →Raul654 20:27, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
Support. Some day I intend to learn Mahjong and actually understand it... As others have stated, in the future if this article continues to expand (and there's certainly plenty of room for it to do so) it'll need to be split up into different articles. Right now, the length is just fine. Zerbey 13:52, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think it could still use a bit of tweaking in some awkward areas, but I withdraw my objection. Exploding Boy 18:31, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)
Object. This is a decent article, but it needs references. See Wikipedia:Cite your sources. Consider this as my support when references have been added. Jeronimo 11:33, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Rewrite, refine and revise. More attractive photos, perchance drawn CGs, are highly appreciated (To be honest, the photos are in poor quality =( ). I think there's an outstanding featured article, Go (board game), to follow. --06:24, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Terminology and further developments

I'm thinking about 2 things:

1. terminology. It has got to a point that due to the different names from the different rulesets, as well as the inheritant language problem, even basic terms could have a lot of synonyms. Should we agree on a set of terms to use on all Mahjong pages? It would seem less confusing to me.

2. further developments. The whole set of articles have gone to a point that it is a bit, stranded at this position. Maybe to tabulate and compare the scoring of different mahjogg varients?--XF95．邪 20:56, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Instead of cramming everything on one page, it would be better to have a separate page on each ruleset. Then on the main article, only point out the unique differences from all other rules. For example, Cantonese mahjong does not use the wildcard at all. That can be pointed out in as a summary. Then each separate rule article can go in details for any reader who really wants to learn about certain set of rules. Kowloonese 23:25, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

Most rulesets differ by only scoring details (mainly what criteria scores what), and perhaps the definition of what can be constituted a pair (some variations allow the 1 Bamboo to be paired with the 1 Circle, for instance). Scoring, however, is covered under Scoring in Mahjong, and that article needs a new write (for one thing, I still need to clear up that points and score thing).

Also recall that this article failed one FAC nomination, so we might need to make significant changes. The only thing that I can think of that we can add to the article is adding more on American (NMJL/AMJA) rules (which are barely covered) and Western Classical (ie. Wright-Patterson) rules, and perhaps add the Babcock scoring system that seems to be on every Wikipedia (with a Mahjong article) but this one.

I agree with Kowloonese's thoughts on a basic level, but the basic rules are mainly the same. The only variations that I've seen using Joker tiles are NMJL/AMJA rules, which are a bit tough (and the strategy is another monster altogether), and perhaps should be relegated to an article specifically devoted to American Mahjong. Before we do that, someone will have to obtain the American and Western Classical rulesets from their governing bodies (and those are not free), and for American Mahjong, a scoring card.

The terminology used in Mahjong remain consistent - we know what the tiles are called, most of the scoring combinations, etc. What kinds of terminology consistencies are you referring to anyways?

kelvSYC 01:36, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I might misslead the point on the use of the word inconsistantencies. In fact, the problem arises when I try to translate the article on Japanese Mahjong Scoring Rule, and found myself stuck to using the Japanese terminology, not the English or Cantonese ones.

For example, Even I know the accepted "universal" form of han in the Japanese variety is called faan in chinese and simplified to fan in international usage, I could not restraint myself from using han altogether in the same article. Although using fan could (hopefully) make the article universally understandable, the term was always han in their usage.

I am on the way of thinking that if every ruleset in Wiki was written with different terms for the same thing, it would make the casual non-player quite confused.

Or if the way out is to make an article to place all the mahjong terms of all naming conventions? So every article could be written in its own native terms, but by linking to such a library article, hopefully the problem shall diminish. --XF95．邪 02:57, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What I tried to do in Scoring in Mahjong (when it was once part of the main article) was develop some standard English terminology. This can be used to create a spiringboard of sorts in order to translate a specific variation's term to a standard term. kelvSYC 21:51, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps scoring in Mahjong is not exactly the method to do so, and I insist that it should be limited to scoring only. I suggest that an article or even a list shall be created for the list of common ...yaku(that I cannot find a word which can be as concise and to the point other than it), as well as a list of the common terminiology.--XF95．邪 06:41, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Keep in mind that, by wiki convention, English terms should be used whenever possible, and the local terms should be included. That's why, for example, pung is considered a noun and not a verb - the English terminology (as introduced by Babcock) considers it as such. I still agree, however, that a variation's specific name for a common term should be included in the article (see Mahjong tiles, where we use Dragon tiles rather than the Chinese sanyuanpai or the Japanese sangenpai). Lists of terminology and scoring criteria should be largely unnecessary. kelvSYC 00:57, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well, most non-American varieties of playing did include a number of hands that are quite standard. Repeating them in all (common) variaties of Mahjong does not make more sense than making an article listing out all of them. --XF95．邪 04:01, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree to that. I don't have a problem with it. I can see Scoring in Mahjong having the basic definitions and having each individual scoring page refer to it. I can certainly see something along the lines of: kokushimusou - the Thirteen Terminals hand (insert link to section on thirteen terminals in Scoring in Mahjong in that line). kelvSYC 03:47, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Might be Hands of Mahjong would fit that purpose?

Keep everything separated instead of making that into another jumble of different nouns and ideas

I found out something in other sources. It turns out that the Japanese Scoring is not the only one using a Basic Score ^ doubles. Maybe I woul rework the relavant article, or it might be another reason to separate scoring, hands and rules into 2 articles plus a list. --XF95．邪 09:16, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The rules introduced by Babcock to America are based on the same point-and-double system. The major non-point-and-double systems AFAIK are the Cantonese systems (plain old points) and the American system (which is a completely different beast altogether). kelvSYC 13:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It seems like you want to split Scoring in Mahjong into two articles: one for the generalities of how to score and the other for the most common scoring criteria and special hands. It seems like a "big mess" is being split into two "smaller messes". Why is Scoring in Mahjong, in your opinion, too jumbled? kelvSYC 13:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Won't it be a lot better when an interwinding mess is splitted into 2 interconnected mess? It would remain to be a mess, though. --XF95．邪 18:56, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mahjong and movies

If my memory serves me, there was a Mahjong movie starred by Andy Lau and Gigi Leung few years ago. Another coming-soon one would be the Mahjong Kungfu starred by the "landlady" in Kungfu Hustle. Would anyone write about the influence of Mahjong on movie-making industry? --Jerry Crimson Mann 06:34, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sitting on a rock?

The rulebook of my mahjong set bought in Sweden seems to be fairly close to the Hong Kong rules. However, one feature I haven't seen elsewhere is that it is required to announce when one can make mahjong with one more tile. We say "I am sitting on a rock". Is this the case for other known mahjong rules as well, and what would be said in english/cantonese/mandarin? – Foolip 14:58, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

In Chinese you say 'ting pai'; I don't know what the characters are. It's also customary to lay your tiles face down in front of you. In the informal games I play it's not requiered, but people will ask each other, 听了没？

That sounds like the Japanese rule riichi in which you cannot change to a different one after your announcment, you trade your flexibility for a bonus. In the Hong Kong rules, there is no bonus for making such announcement. In fact, it is usually a strategic no-no to let your opponent know you are close to winning. Of course, some people bluff. I can assure you that Swedish rule is definitely not in the Hong Kong rule. Kowloonese 22:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

If a player is one tile short of winning, they are said to be "listening" for a tile (hence, ting pai). Players are not supposed to announce this fact (being something of strategic value rather than something in the rules). In Japanese and international competition, there is the riichi rule, in which you can announce this fact, and lock down your hand (by putting your hand face down) until someone discards (or you self-pick) the desired tile for a scoring bonus. Some scoring variations also award points for having a hand that listens only for a single tile (ie. du ting, but this is subject to interpretation: if two tiles can win, and all four of one have already been discarded, does it count as du ting?).

Admittedly, I have never heard of what is apparently there in Sweden, where you can declare riichi and not lock down your hand.

Note that ting pai is really a "standard mahjong" phoenomena - in American Mahjong it means a little less due to the wildcard factor. I have never seen riichi used with American Mahjong, largely due to the complications of wildcard replacement rules while your hand is locked down.

kelvSYC 22:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright concerns regarding the pictures in this article

The majority of the photos in the article are screen shots from some movies. I don't know which movies, but the people in these pictures are well known movie stars. The poster either was present in these celebrity's gambling party, or he simply capture some screenshot from a DVD of some movies. I thought that the wikipedia guidelines for using screen shot from movie is that no more than one shot for each article. The usage here is clearly a violation of the rules. Kowloonese 22:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] American Mahjong.

Since American Mahjong is so distinct from the original game. I think a separate entry should be used to explain American Mahjong. This is because it disrupts the flow of thoughts for someone who wanted to know how to play the game. The rules and procedures of the orignal game are interspersed with American Mahjong. Changed 17:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Complete suits?

The reference to "complete suits (usually of threes)" in the introduction is odd. I'd interpret that to mean that the hand has to be all one suit or contain all the members of a suit, and while these are special hands in some variants of the game, it certainly isn't a requirement for winning the hand in most versions close to the Chinese game. However, I'm not sure exactly how it should be rephrased given the huge variations in what constitutes a winning hand, especially considering American mahjong. Perhaps the phrase should be something like "the object of the game is to collect tiles that form winning hands", but that's sort of circular. --Matt McIrvin 05:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

They may be comparing Mahjong to rummy, but still it should be correctly termed melds. kelvSYC 19:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What's the source for 麻将 meaning "sparrow"?

I have access to a lot of Chinese dictionaries. I've never seen a single one -- including the infamously complete 词海 (lit. "word ocean" -- sort of the OED of Chinese dictionaries) -- that says that the game was named after a bird. Further the dictionaries I do have say that "sparrow" is 麻雀 (má qüè in Pinyin) with no historical references to it ever being called 麻将（má jiàng).

I'd love to see a citation on this. I'll watch for a few days and if none are forthcoming, I'll turf that piece of misinformation.

majiang is the name of the game - it has never referred to the bird. maque, however, is a Southern Chinese (ie. Guangdong) localism, and may be more familiar to most readers as the name Mahjong is derived from this. It may be named for the 1 bamboo, which usually has a picture of a bird on it (likely a sparrow). kelvSYC 19:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, good God! The whole speculation on what the words mean needs to be edited right out! The "Che" => "Chee" => "Chow" needs to die a brutal death, for example. Because the word used (in Mandarin) is 吃（chī)-- which means "eat". As in "I'll eat that piece". The word spoken in English as "Pong" is 碰 (pèng) -- which means "bump" or "meet". And the final word, spoken in English as "Kong" is 杠 (gàng) and means "bridge" or "pole". They have absolutely nothing to do with 孔夫子's family name, wife's name or anything of the sort. (Source: my Chinese wife and her mother.)

Again, without citations, this part is going to die a horrible, brutal death.

I've seen chi and chow, the former from Chinese sources and the latter from Western sources describing the Babcock game (eg. Robert Charles Bell in Board and Table Games from Many Civilizations. Chee may be a corruption of chi, seeing how westerners may not be familiar with hanyu pinyin. But any links to Confucious is at best questionable -- the only concrete evidence of Mahjong comes from the Taiping rebellion. kelvSYC 19:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative Names for Tiles

Coming from a Western household who played Mah jong for many years, we use different names for the tiles:

Circles - Plates
Characters - Cracks

We also had a couple of specific ones:

White Dragon - White Soap (probably from the character's oblong shape)
1 Bamboo - Dickie bird (as it had a picture of a bird perching on the bamboo)
8 Bamboo - Maggie's britches (no idea about that one, probably related to the 'M' shape)

Anybody else use these or other names, or was it just our screwy family? --Jquarry 00:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The 1 Bamboo is traditionally referred to as a sparrow, due to most sets featuring a decorative bird. American Mahjong uses "Craks" as a substitute for "Character" (so "1 Crak" and "1 Character" is the same), but Chinese and international rules do not use "crak". Users of Mahjong solitaire will also refer to the character suit as "crak", due to the manual of Shanghai having stated as such (in such a parlance, however, the bamboo suit is abbreviated to "bam" and the circle suit is referred to as "dots"). I have never heard of the other terms in any common usage. BTW, there is no character on the white dragon. The tiles in most sets are either entirely blank or has a blue decorative frame (to tell them apart from actual "replacement tiles"). kelvSYC 19:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/h/Talk%7EMahjong_4221.html"

Categories: Unassessed China-related articles | Unknown-importance China-related articles | Old requests for peer review