Talk:Nertz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] NNA

What is NNA, it can't figure out what it means. Also this section is hard to read. maybe putting bullet points in would be good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.200.167 (talk) 11:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

The NNA is an abbreviation for the National Nertz Association. They have specific terminology listed at the bottom of the article as reference for NNA members, events, and other interested parties. The article could be a bit more tighty. However, there is a lot of information on this game and many different rules and variations to record accurately. Like many other wiki articles this one is still a work in progress but I think it is still very informative. I had no idea that there were so many variations and other Nertz related sites to view until I found them here. It wasn’t too hard for me to understand the article, so "good job" thus far editors. Keep it up! Random wikireader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.195.2.196 (talk) 23:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging with Racing Demon

Since this article and Racing Demon are about the same game, it seems they need to be merged. One would remain the main article with this text, and the other would become a redirect. It might be best to pick the most common name of the game (though it has so many names). Does anyone know which is the most often used name of the game? I always knew it as either Pounce or Racing Demon, but I'm guessing that it really varries. -- Natalya 11:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they are the same game. My grandmother (who was unbeatable) used to play Racing Demon as a child, and it was like Klondike. So Racing Demon can refer to a totally different game, whereas Nertz cannot. I can't remember the exact rules but I remember you could build anywhere but perhaps there was a one-card restriction when moving to other users pile. Macgruder 21:28, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
It seems like they are all perhaps variations on the same game? The article certainly needs a lot of cleanup, but hopefully at some point the different variations can be clarified, and if it turns out that one is totally different, it can be moved. -- Natalya 02:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging with Racing Demon

You can merge it if you want to.  I think Nertz is more common.  I've never ever heard this entitled Racing Demon, and I've known about the game for years.
I'll wait a few more days to see if there are any thoughts against it, and then merge. Keeping it at Nertz is fine, after all the article is already here, and Racing Demon can become a redirect. -- Natalya 03:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Do you know how to edit category pages? There is a Solitaire Games category page that I would like to add Nertz to, but I don't know how to do it because when you try editing it no source code comes up. -- Berenlazarus
You were on the right track - to put a page into a category, you add a tag at the end of the page with the category name, like this:
[[Category:CATEGORY NAME]]
So for this page, I added [[Category:Solitaire card games]] to the page, and it's now in the category. I also removed [[Category:Nertz]] from the category Solitaire card games, since it does not exist and does not belong there. -- Natalya 12:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for that info. I meant to remove the Nertz on the category path, the one that I added. Glad to know how to do that now.
Since there were no objections, I merged the two articles by taking the information from Racing Demon, adding it to this article, and making Racing Demon a redirect. -- Natalya 18:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hoorah

Hmm... the addition about the "Hoorah!" variation of Nertz is interesting, but if it was simplu invented by a few people, is it really encyclopedia worthy? It might be good to determine if the variations listed are standardized, or if any variation is able to be put in the article. -- Natalya 17:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

That's the version I've always played, which I learned from my parents which they learned from their parents etc so I think it's ok.

[edit] Use of the word "team"

Since Nertz (as far as I'm aware) is played with single players playing against each other, is it really appropriate to use the term "team"? Regardless, after the recent edits, the article requires some copyediting. -- Natalya 23:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NNA has standardized rules

I am sorry but much of the information on this site is completely erroneous and exactly what the National Nertz Association is trying to eliminate. This game HAS been standardized and has a rulebook! The rules posted by McDell are right. Unless you all have a national nertz association to back you up, please leave them alone.

Also, a posting for National Nertz Association (NNA) is forthcoming. It's an important organization that is currently blossoming in the southwest and its rules are being used everywhere from Mexico to Utah to Pennsylvania. It is the only National Nertz organization in existence and has the only official standardized rules.

While the variations of the game that are posted on this website are of historical value, the standardized version of the game (as per NNA rules) is the only officially recognized Nertz game (and thus the rules in the main article should be specific to the NNA's codified rules).

Before reverting long-term edits, please give some evidence, and cite your sources from the national nertz association. You cannot just make claims without citing them; it is a Wikipedia policy. Otherwise, your edits will be reverted. -- Natalya 15:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NNA's Standardized rules not recognized by Hoyle or Pagat

NNA might have standardized rules, but who's to say they're the real authority on Nertz? As referenced in the current version of the article, the NNA's rules have not been accepted on an international level the same way as Chess or Monopoly has. Wikipedia is not just about the American viewpoint. By definition, National American refers to American players. I'm from England, played Nertz a lot of years, and none of my friends acknowledge NNA as the "official" rules of Nertz. Neither does the international community for that matter. The NNA's rules, until they are accepted the same way the Chess and Monopoly rules have been, are as much a variation of the basic gameplay of Nertz as any other set of rules. -- berenlazarus 12:12 a.m. September 3, 2006.

For those interested, I tried googling "National Nertz Association," as well as "National Nerts Association," and only came up with three hits, all of which came from MySpace. Not only that, the rules listed within the article currently (not the NNA rules) are very similiar to those listed on Hoyle's card website, House of Cards, which links to the Pagat rules (listed in the article now). I consider both the Hoyle rules and the Pagat rules as much more authoratative than some so-called NNA. If anything, the rules in the main article should conform to Hoyle and Pagat, as they are respected as an international authority on card game rules, not NNA.

And here's another question. This guy says the NNA rules are the only "officially recognized Nertz" rules, but none of the game sites and card sites I have been too use either the NNA terminology, or their set of rules. Who exactly is recognizing them as the official rules? If the only people recognizing the NNA rules as the "standard" rules of Nerts are the NNA themselves, that's just a circular argument and they have no real authority. -- berenlazarus 12:22 a.m. September 3, 2006--

--

There's a lot of discussion about chess and monopoly, which are both board games -- isn't this like comparing apples to waffles?

[edit] Is the National Nertz Association a big fat lie?

I can't find the NNA anywhere on Google. Who put it into the article? Because unless they're trustworthy, I'd recommend taking all mention of this apparently nonexistent association out of the article. If anyone has any information on it, though, please tell me, because I'd really like to find these people if they exist. Twilight Realm 03:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks like the person above who is talking about McDell is, in fact, McDell. I may be wrong, but that's what it looks like to me. And, McDell hasn't made any contributions to any article except this one. Sadly, I think that this person is lying to us. McDell, if you're reading this, feel free to prove me wrong. I'd be happy to hear that there really is an NNA. Twilight Realm 03:44, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
When it was first put into the article, it did seem pretty questionable. I would support removing all references until any proof of its validity is given. -- Natalya 03:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Until there is some evidence that this is real, I am going to remove all refernces to it; Wikipedia (and its mirror sites) are the only ones who mention it, and we should not be perpetuating false information. -- Natalya 14:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

There is evidence of the NNA at www.playnertz.com. The site is still in construction, but there is some information there. Please re-post the terminology listed for the NNA. Anyone will soon be welcomed to join once the site is finished. Also, you will be able to receive any Nertz related information that you would like. Please note that NNA members currently use this medium to look at specific terminolgy for play on a national scale. There is a copyrighted version of a specific Nertz rulebook that the NNA uses, however the terminology posted here, is not infringing on those rights. So please let it's members have a place to get this particular brand of Nertz information. Just because you can't google information on something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Members of the NNA would appreciate it if a few people did not resort to defamation or writing slanderous material about the NNA. Our intention is not to lie about an organization, it is to help it's current members get the information that they need. This is especially the case seeing that the same two to three people are writing that they personally have never heard of the NNA. Since Nertz is a game with many variations, you should respect the way a certain organization chooses to play it, as well as not be so critical of it's rules. The other rules can just as easily be disputed as well. Thank you for your concern and your future ackowledgemnt of the information posted by the NNA.

That's great that we have a URL, and we know that it does exist. Thank you for providing that information. We still have a ways to go to clean up this article, though. And we still need to be able to cite our sources that give us information about the NNA, which is somewhat hard to do as the site is under construction. We look forward to being able to add more information as more becomes avaliable. -- Natalya 18:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

It seems pretty evident that this article requires a lot of cleanup. I think we can work together to make a much more encyclopedic article, and I hope everyone agrees. If we take a look at (just for example) Solitaire, it is a very clean article, and rather straightfoward. Even though there are surely many variations on the game, it deals with them well. Of course Solitaire has a broader range of types, and therefore is able to have a list of related games, but we can probably make cleaner sections of the various different rules for Nertz.

This article is certainly hard to deal with, because Nertz has many different variations and names, and it surely keeps changing. This is when we need to keep in mind Wikipedia's policy of Verifiability. To quote, "Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources." By using this policy, we should be able to clear up this article to a more encyclopedic standard.

It's important that we find reliable sources about Nertz, so that we can cite them appropriately. Even though many of us surely know many different variations of the game, if there is not reliable evidence for them, we cannot include them in this article. Wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopedia. We must remember, Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day.

If we can appropriately cite this article, we can make it pretty great. It will take a lot of work, and I'm sure we won't all be happy as information is changed/removed, but I think we can do it, as long as there are dedicated editors behind it. Can we do it? -- Natalya 18:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)