Talk:Spiel des Jahres

Initial Paragraph

The last sentence is unclear and misleading in its use of the verb expect. The winners cannot expect to sell 30 million copies.

Untitled

What is the game Focus? The article that was there was a Dutch band, which I moved toFocus (band).But the focus of a mirror isn't a game either. -phma

See the new pageFocus (board game)Percy Snoodle15:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

I removed the following sentence from the first paragraph:

However, some game fanatics feel that in the last couple of years, the award has been awarded for diplomatic reasons, cycling between the three or four largest game producers in Germany.

Perhaps someone could find a source for this sentiment or rewrite the sentence entirely.Rossumcapek14:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey so now it says "recent years have been more controversial" without any sort of explanation, let alone a citation. I'm going to delete it.— Precedingunsignedcomment added by115.64.37.47(talk) 05:55, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

"German-style"

Saying the Spiel des Jahres is an awardfor"German-style board games"seems like an unsupported assertion. The committee itself doesn't seem to impose any a priori" style "requirement on the candidates in its stated policies, other than that they be (A) board or card games (B) suitable for family play and (C) released in Germany (which, as per the usual confusion, is not what is meant by" German-style "). --Stellmach15:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I sort of agree;German-style board gamesis a terrible name (and it looks like it'll be moved to the IMO worse "Eurogames" soon, as a result of a hijacked RM) but the criteria there do match pretty well that is meant by condition B. I think it's worth linking to that page in some way, so I've linked "family style" to it.Percy Snoodle15:33, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

My mistake, they've just closed the RM with "no consensus".Percy Snoodle15:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

This seems like a good approach. The prize obviously carries a lot of weight in the designer games community and is hardly separable from that movement. But while being a designer game ( "Eurogame," eek) probably helps towina Spiel des Jahres, the prize is "for" (i.e. open to) family board games and card games in general. So, yeah, clearly a link is needed, but not the one we had. --Stellmach17:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

What about instead describing these as European style non-knockout family board games. Non-knockout can be clarified with examples such as Monopoly or Risk, in which players are eliminated from the game before its ultimate conclusion. --Greg.Padilla15:42, 08 June 2009—Precedingunsignedcomment added by173.19.176.235(talk)

Sort order

Why is the list of children's game of the year in ascending order (by year), while the other lists are in descending order? --84.144.212.12616:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Done- all lists have been set to ascending order at some point in the past.Retswerb(talk) 06:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Nominated

Should we modify the table to include the names of the games that were nominated each year? --Pixelface17:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Mensa Select recipients

List of Mensa Select recipients,the game award by AmericanMensa,just got a RFD. Could you peek in, and give your opinion? I just created the categoryMind Games (Mensa),mentioned it on the Mensa discussion page, and the RFD popped up.samwaltz18:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Klondike - wrong game is linked

The "Klondike" game that is linked in the article underChildren's Game of the year(Klondike (board game)) has the same name but is not the same Klondike game that won the award. I'd like to repair this, but the award-winning one doesn't have its own article yet. I'm not sure how to resolve this - remove the link (leaving just the name of the game as an unlinked text), or change the link to a "red" one (link to an unwritten article). And if so, how to call the new link/article? "Klondike (board game 2)"? Or something else? 78.51.75.72(talk) 14:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

i did change it toKlondike (board game 2001)(not perfect, but better than wrong)Elvis(talk) 10:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Translation of the special awards

As far as I can see, the official title for the special awards readspecial award "beautiful game"(and not"most beautiful game") on theofficial website.Similar with the other special awards, there's nomostorbest use ofindicated in the name of the special awards. Was it introduced on purpose or is it just a translation flaw?Thommey(talk) 20:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I just foundthisand it supports what I said. I changed the special award names in the article.thommey(talk) 13:07, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Wrong link

|2004 |Recommended |Attika |Marcel-André Casasola Merkle |Rio Grande

Wrong link, linkes to an Island not a boardgame.

Done- Removed wikilink.Retswerb(talk) 06:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link onSpiel des Jahres.Please take a moment to reviewmy edit.If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQfor additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archivehttps://web.archive.org/web/20060529181952/http://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/spiel_des_jahres_nominees/tohttp://www.boardgamenews.com/index.php/boardgamenews/comments/spiel_des_jahres_nominees/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018,"External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot.No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verificationusing the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permissionto delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfCbefore doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them withthis tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them withthis tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)08:43, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Image

Why is the image for this page the photo of some guy, rather than the image of the award itself?71.197.176.10(talk) 03:53, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@71.197.176.10(talk) - I am not sure which image you refer to, i.e. which images existed in 2021, as the Wikipedia page currently has no 'infobox' photo. However, if it is the current top image, i.e. the one of "Harald Schrapers", which has become a psedo-'Title Image', then I completely agree! I think the "Randy Flynn" photo, which shows the award in it, is a much better one as the 'Title Image' for the 'info box', until one is found which just shows the award itself. Let's start a discussion on this here! Please reply with your views, if you are reading this.SMargan(talk) 13:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Redundancy of the "All Winners" Section

I have noticed that the "All Winners" section appears to be duplicating the information that should be in the "Awards and nominees" section, if that section was fully complete. I am currently making changes to make the "Awards and nominees" section a complete set of tables from all the recipient of honours from 1978 to the current year. In the meantime, I am hoping that a discussion is started as to what function the other "All winners" section fulfills. Does it need deleting, or, at very least, having superfluous information, e.g. like the "Publisher" column, removed to simplify it and avoid information repitition. I hope this starts some discussion on what people see the point of the "All winners" section is. Everyone! Feel free to post your individual thoughts, in the form of a reply to this post.SMargan(talk) 13:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)