Talk:Dominoes

This link contains lots of rules for domino games. Its content is not free, so we can't use it here directly, but I hope enthusiasts of one or more games will create articles about those games here, and this link should remain here as a good resource. --LDC

Domino Day

"The Netherlands has hosted an annual domino toppling exhibition called Domino Day since 1986." There were Domino Day like Events as early as 1986, and the Domino Day itself was annual (except 2003), but only from 1998 until 2009. Proof is on the german Entry of Domino Day. Now, I'm just to shy to edit by myself... 188.22.35.39 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:23, 8 December 2011 (UTC).

fixed the math

There are 28, not 21, tiles in a double 6 set. I'll try to revert if I can find the change in the history. ... The issue is this: the triangular # formulas are correct, but dominoes include a blank "number" as well. Therefore, for a double-6 set "n" == 7 !! (7*(7+1)/2 = 28) Kace7 (talk) 21:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Corrected. And, clarified. Kace7 (talk) 22:02, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you gave a different formula than the one in the article. In the formula in the article that is [(n+1)(n+2)]/2 tiles and if n=6, and that gives [(6+1)(6+2)]/2 = 7*8/2 = 56/2 = 28. Try to use n=7 on this formula. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 16:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Sort of. :) The version I was looking at had the equation as I put it above (see [before my undo]). In my rush to correct the plainly wrong article, I undid the bad revision, then, very soon after, I wrote the clarifying note -- without noticing that the formulas had been changed by the undo. Kace7 (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Stacy Dominoes?

I removed this passage from the end of the article:

"Another less common variation of dominos is known as Stacy Dominos in which the rules are less concrete and alter according to the whims of the creator of the game. At the time of the publication of this definition, there is actually only one person who knows how to play this game."

Regardless of the spelling errors, there are problems with this. If this is true, and it sounds too far-fetched to be true, it is not widespread enough to be included in an encyclopedic article. Also, the entry is unreferenced. A Google search of "Stacy Dominoes" yields zero hits. All of this leads me to believe the entry needed to be removed. Jamesfett 15:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Scoring

"Muggins (or, All Fives or Five Up)

Points are earned when a player plays a bone with the result that the count (the sum of all open ends) is a multiple of five. The points earned are equal to the sum of the ends. Therefore, if in the course of play a player plays a bone that makes the sum of the ends 5, 10, 15 or 20, the player scores that number. All pips on a crosswise doublet are included in the count."

Is this right, wrong, or poorly phrased? The way I learned to play, a player gets points for the multiple of 5, not the number of spots. E.g. if your sum is 15, you get 3 points. And the spots on a double count as long as it's on an end, but not after another dom has been played on it.

—wwoods 23

17, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

In English pubs it's common for players to place their dominoes in two rows so they may be picked up with one hand, leaving the other hand free to drink a pint.

Is this an unsigned comment? I thought if someone didn't identify themselves that the computer used would be automatically identified? Ileanadu (talk) 12:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

I have a different question on scoring. The article says that in a blocked game:

... the winner can often be determined by counting the pips in all players' hands.

Who wins? Who gets to add to their score? The player with the most pips or the player with the fewest pips? Are the winner's pips included in the winner's score? Totally clueless here. By the way, this is not the first time I've ended up with that same question while looking up domino rules.

I guess the answer is supposed to be obvious once you know the rules, but it isn't to me. If the opponent or opposing team's score is determined by the pips in one's hand, then one goal would be to end up with few points. The person with the fewest pips would seem to be closer to being "empty" than the person with more pips and thus would win. On the other hand, since the objective is to achieve a high score, the person with the most pips would have the advantage. Also, in a basic game does the person who blocked the last end get any points for their move? Ileanadu (talk) 12:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Alabama

Why Dominoes may not be played on Sunday in Alabama? --84.61.54.65 16:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Reorganization needed

No offense guys, but this article needs help. Overlooking the monstrous intro paragraph for a moment, I was reading the Common domino games section, trying to learn the game, and was assaulted by these opening sentences:

Most domino games are block games or draw games. In draw games, players draw from the boneyard when they have no matching bone. In block games, players pass and forfeit the turn when they have no matching bone. Otherwise, there is no difference.

Are these really the first four things we want to say about common domino games? As someone who hasn't played dominoes before, this contains very little information. What is a boneyard? What does it mean to "draw" from the boneyard? What is a "bone", and what is a "matching bone"? I realize some of these terms may be defined earlier in the article, but that's not sufficient. A Wikipedia article is not like a software program: you can't just define a bunch of jargon at the top of the article and use it later on without expecting readers to become confused.

To me, the most basic thing about dominoes is that the objective is to play all of one's dominoes before the other player does. Thankfully, this appears in the first paragraph, but for some reason it's hidden at the end. The next most basic thing about dominoes is that a domino is played by matching half of one domino to half of another one. I haven't scanned the article to see if this appears somewhere in it; frankly, I shouldn't have to. I think it should be one of the very first things we say in Common domino games. Instead, the current first sentence digresses to "train games" and "Mexican dominoes" before even describing the basic gameplay.

I don't know enough about dominoes to rewrite large parts of this article, but I'm willing to help with the effort if any of the domino experts in the crowd can pitch in. The first suggestion I'd make is to have a "basic gameplay" section followed by a section on variations. Any takers? --Doradus 15:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Come on, somebody. Apparently it's been a year and there is still no 'basic gameplay' section. I came here today to learn how to play but just wasted my time... --Dec 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.113.122.206 (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree. Obviously this article is written for people who already know how to play. This is ridiculous. I'll look elsewhere before I consider Wikipedia again for information about rules for playing common games. roricka 11 July 2008

Mexican train

Does anyone know what the difference between Mexican train and Private train to me they sound the same.--Psjoding 20:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Etymology

Isn't the etymology derived from Polyominoes? 81.208.165.173

No. It's the other way around. The resemblence between "do-" and the greek prefix "di-" is coincidental, and suggested the coinage of the much newer word "polyomino." -Stellmach 15:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

It is very popular here in the Dominican Republic. Perhaps that´s where it got it´s name? -a traveler. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.167.71.13 (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Who are you?

Who set the 4M-fall record in '06? Pete Townsend 18:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

African American Culture

I am curious as to exactly how the game became such a big part of African American culture. Perhaps this page needs a section on cultural influence/popularity. I know this game is very popular among Italians as well (at least in New York). Scott Free 17:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Section for domino Solitaire games

On the Puremco site which is linked at the top of this page there is a domino solitaire game called traffice. The rules are not clear, like many of the rules on that game. Does anyone know this game? How do you play?

---

Domino Wars

Evidently invented in 2008-03, this was posted on this page on 2008-03-25. It is 2008-03-30 as I delete it from the page, while preserving the text here on the Talk page, should this "little-known game" have merit.

• Domino Wars is a little known game invented in March 2008 by Joel Stephenson and co in Coventry, UK. Whilst experimenting with ways to use the seemingly boring pieces. Two players are involved; they sit approximately 2meters apart (although this may vary according to the level of difficulty). Each player has 14 dominoes, and a Coaster. They must use 9 of their dominoes to build a "fortress" which must comprise of two layers. The other 5 dominoes must be used to knock down the opponents fortress. The winner of domino wars is the player with the most dominoes still standing after all 5 shots.

How about some evidence before adding such inventions to the Wikipedia? Or at least a definition of a "Coaster". -- Evertype·✆ 22:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

This sounds imho more like a Pub game or a Drinking game than a valid variant of dominoes. Properly designed and with a stylish set of rules then it might qualify as a Dexterity game. Should be removed? Salisbury-99 (talk) 16:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Mahjongg is not a domino game

Mahjongg may be made of thick blocks similar in shape to dominoes but it is primarily a card-game. The links should be amended if there is consensus on this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salisbury-99 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

So Mahjongg is a card game that uses tiles, and Texas 42 is a domino game played like a card game. The line is undoubtedly blurry here. However, it is accepted, from the response to your similar talk section on the Talk:Game page, that both domino games and the mahjongg family are "tile games". Tile games that aren't domino games are usually games similar to cards but using tiles instead, and are thus neither fully here nor there. Maybe a tile game page needs to be created or expanded upon, that can mention Mahjongg, Rummikub and domino games.

Dominoes are defined as double-ended pieces with a dividing line. I see no resemblance to a Mahjongg tile and therefore, as yet, no debate as to consensus. Salisbury-99 (talk) 10:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Size

If I were an alien looking at this page I would have a lot of trouble working out how big dominos are. There are details of materials but nothing about dimensions, and all the pictures lack any size context. RPTB1 (talk) 17:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

A funny concept, but I agree. They could be as big as a house! Dominoes can come in any size of course and still be called dominoes, but perhaps a standard size could be listed. Common sense comes into reason of course, such as, since they are a game, they are most likely movable by hand and relatively small, for ease of play and manipulation. I'm sure if one of us bought 20 domino sets from 20 manufacturers, they would differ within a small range of size. ie. 2-3" in length and .75"-1.25" in width. Aliens, beware our huge dominos. Ratataz (talk) 03:55, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

History of Domino Toppling

I'm hoping someone can add a history for when toppling dominoes began and when it gained popularity. That's the entire reason I came to Wikipedia today. I'm sure there would be some significance to this. Kit Foxtrot (talk) 19:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Materials?

The second paragraph discusses materials for dominoes. The last sentence in the paragraph talks about natural materials, and that they are "much more expensive than polymer materials". However, polymers aren't mentioned elsewhere as domino materials.

I'm guessing that polymers should be added early in the paragraph, but have no knowledge to back that up. Anyone? -- Dan Griscom (talk) 12:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing Information

For the most neophyte of players (me) there is confusion in the article (I think) as what is known about the other player's hand. I found this:

Once the players begin drawing tiles, they are typically placed on-edge before the players, so that each player can see his own tiles, but none can see the value of other players tiles. Every player can thus see how many tiles remain in the other players hands at all times during gameplay.

on another site (sorry about the cut and paste).

I'll not edit at this time because I'm a complete Dominoes dumbell but if some watchlister agrees then please add this information. If it is already in the article please feel free to slap me for the oversight. hydnjo (talk) 02:53, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Went bold and added info. Undo, delete or modify if I screwed up. hydnjo (talk) 03:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Redraw:

Certain variations of the game allow a re-draw if 4 or more of the dominoes in a player's hand turn out to be doubles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.8.72 (talk) 10:34, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Spelling

I see that there has been an edit conflict between dominos and dominoes I would like to point out there is a word dominos, In Chamber's it is only for the cloak and not for the playing piece.Tetron76 (talk) 16:00, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what the "correct" spelling is (which is really what people are actually using, rather than what a dictionary defines, since a dictionary is descriptive, describing what people use, rather than prescriptive, prescribing what people should use). What I do know is that this article is inconsistent and should use one consistently throughout! http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=dominos%2C%20dominoes&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT-1 clearly indicates that the version without an "e" is more popular as a search term, though maybe the pizza company of that name has a big influence, and I would want players of the game to give their views. Rugops (talk) 18:52, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

History: King Tut

I have removed the section saying the "oldest known domino set was found in Tutankhamen's tomb". There were *no* dominoes in King Tut's tomb. In his exhaustive contemporaneous handwritten cards of all the artefacts found in the tomb, the excavator Howard Carter makes no mention of dominoes. He does list three "games-boxes" (items that he numbered 345, 393 and 395): they contained only knuckle-bones, "playing pieces" (similar to draughtsmen) and throwing sticks. (Ref: http://www.griffith.ox.ac.uk/gri/carter/)

In addition, these first six sentences I have excised were a direct lift from the website that was referenced as an external link (http://www.worlddomino.com/history.htm). Apart from the assertion that dominoes were found in King Tut's tomb, there are at least three other errors in this short section (the correct information below is from the Wikipedia entry on Tutankhamun]

• "Tutankhamen's tomb, among the ruins of Thebes." No, it is in the Valley of the Kings
• "Tutankhamen was king ... 1355 BC." No, his dates were approx. 1341 BC – 1323 BC
• "The set is now in King Tutankhamen's Museum, Cairo, Egypt. " No, there is no museum with this name.

I therefore consider the webpage www.worlddomino.com/history.htm to be an unreliable source of facts, and have deleted it from the article.

Gallina3795 (talk) 15:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Never mind what I said before. I misread your comment. Is there a definitive source for the history of dominoes - an "according to Hoyle"? Ileanadu (talk) 12:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The King Tut history is legit, The Royal Game of Ur or Game of Twenty Squares was unearthed in excavations in the 1920’s and is considered one the oldest complete board games. Commonly reffered to as 1922 discovery of 1 several Senet board games in the Egyptian Tomb of King Tutankhamen. References of Senet and fragments of Senet game boards date back further than the 2600BC’s and is referred to as a royal game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:CDC6:200:8936:65AF:8A06:7F59 (talk) 23:01, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

References

(in the Caribbean)

Popularity in Puerto Rico

Dominoes is a huge trend in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. It's actually almost traditional to play it. However there doesn't seem to be much information about this in this wiki page. This could further provide the detail of the Dominoes history. Why don't you guys look into this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.25.229.61 (talk) 23:17, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Other such examples, & history

Another comment above says the game is very popular in the Dominican Republic. It is also (or was) very popular in Cuba. The game could have been brought to the Caribbean by Spaniards or by the African slaves. Ileanadu (talk) 12:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Linking to Disambiguation pages

Should this page be linked to Bones (disambiguation) due to the nickname?

TauntingElf (talk) 22:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Maiden's Hand

Andrew Lo asserts that Zhou Mi meant dominoes when referring to pupai, since the Ming author Lu Rong (1436–1494) explicitly defined pupai as dominoes (in regards to a story of a suitor who won a maiden's hand by drawing out four winning pupai from a set). https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Dominoes#History

This maiden hand mentioned here,is it a winning hand consists of combination of the four winning pupai?

It's not a physical hand of a human maiden right?ShanghaiWu (talk) 11:36, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dominoes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060816075615/http://pinkandaint.com:80/oldhome/comp/dominoes/index.html to http://www.pinkandaint.com/oldhome/comp/dominoes/index.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://dominofans.ning.com/page/domino-day-2008-1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090127061209/http://unicode.org:80/press/pr-5.1.html to http://www.unicode.org/press/pr-5.1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before 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 with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:08, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

The description of the games seems to be identical with that at this site, but it is not clear which is the source. If onlinecasinobonuswelt.com is the source, it should be summarised and cited, not copied. If Wikipedia is the source, the section should be tagged as needing citations. Is anyone able to work out who has copied whom? Bermicourt (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

To me it looks like that site copied from this article. Partially (just from the domain) it seems like a spammy site, but also most of the matching phrases in this article existed in 2016 (rev 694786397, chosen somewhat arbitrarily) and in 2019 just before the other page was created (rev 928502954). --Pokechu22 (talk) 21:57, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

History of Domino Toppling

Hello? I have not found much about domino toppling, even though it is much more popular than the original dominos game. It's sad that a game that is not interactive takes over 2/3 of the page, while constructing objects with dominoes is barely included. Could you try to expand it please? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.63.8 (talk) 19:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

There is a bit more info on this at Domino show (Domino toppling redirects there). It's mentioned very briefly in the § Other uses section, but I agree that it would be useful to add more information on it. --Pokechu22 (talk) 22:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Who deleted the "Other Uses" Section? This article is supposed to be about dominoes in general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.63.8 (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Dominos Pizza keeping

The Dominos Pizza redirect is already listed in the Domino(Disambiguation) page. Please let me know why you insist on keeping it.107.184.63.8

One hat note is for people who arrived here from the 'Domino' redirect, the other is for people who arrived here from 'Dominos' - MrOllie (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! 107.184.63.8 At least now I know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.63.8 (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

For the sake of clarification, there's a difference between a Wikipedia:Hatnote and a Wikipedia:Redirect. A hatnote is a message at the top of a page, while a redirect is a page that takes you to a different page; for instance, Domino and Dominos both are redirect pages (which I'm linking to using {{R-}}; normally linking to them like domino and dominos will immediately redirect you), while {{Redirect}} is the template that generates a hatnote that tells the reader that a page redirects here. There are other hatnote templates, such as {{about}}.

I personally have mixed feelings about whether the domino game is the WP:MAINTOPIC; when I hear about dominos, I personally think of Domino toppling too (but of course, that's not the only criteria). I don't know how best to organize it, though. It might be best to replace the first redirect note with "This article is about the game. For toppling, see domino toppling. For other uses, see domino (disambiguation)" ({{About|the game|toppling|domino toppling|other uses}}), but that probably requires further discussion and thought. --Pokechu22 (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I also think that Domino Toppling is secondary as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.63.8 (talk) 21:44, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Hatnote war

It appears there is an ongoing hatnote war which I intervened to try and restore what I thought was in line with Wiki practice only to be reverted. The background is that while this article Dominoes is clearly the primary topic, there are dozens of secondary topics as can be seen from Domino (disambiguation). These include domino toppling and Domino's Pizza which are two of the topics that feature in the dispute. My proposal is that we only need to link to Domino (disambiguation) because that covers all other options. The alternative of adding separate hatnotes clutters up the top of the article unnecessarily and immediately begs the question of which ones to include and exclude. Unless there is a consensus over adding more hatnotes, I propose we reduce to one. It could be modified to include "Domino" and "Dominoes" in its text if that's felt to be important. Bermicourt (talk) 18:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• I fully support the decluttered hatnote. All of the other topics can be found at the disambiguation page so there is no need to turn the top of this article into a mini-disambiguation page. The primary purpose of an encyclopedia is the encyclopedia article, not the navigation. -- Whpq (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support - in the form

"Domino" and "Dominos" redirect here. For other uses, see Domino (disambiguation).

The pizza chain has a redirect from Domino's; Dominos redirecting to the present article is not a problem with the revised short hatnote.

Domino toppling is logically a subtopic of Dominoes (since "dominoes" denotes the pieces as well as the game), and should hava a "main article" link at the appropriate place in the article, not a separate hatnote.--Nø (talk) 14:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Toppling is listed in the "see also" section. -- Whpq (talk) 16:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I am aware of that, but I think an ultra-brief section and a main article link would be more appropriate (and might satisfy proponents of a hatnote about toppling better than the See also link).--Nø (talk) 16:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I think I am the one who started this war(resolved with agreement feb 25), and I believe the "dominos" hatnote for the pizza should be there due to popularity, and the "domino" hatnote for domino toppling should be also there due to its popularity. Thanks.107.184.63.8 (talk) 19:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hatnotes are nothing to do with popularity. There are numerous other articles at Domino (disambiguation) which editors could argue are popular and therefore deserving of a hatnote here: Domino theory, Fats Domino, domino effect, Derek and the Dominos, songs called Domino, films called Domino, etc, etc. And then we would end up with the disambiguation page at the top of the article. The whole point of a disambiguation page is to handle all that stuff, so we don't have to clutter up the top of an article.

WP:HATNOTE is quite clear that a) hatnotes should ideally be limited to just one at the top of the page... and b) if a notable topic X is commonly referred to as "Foo", but the article is not about X, there must be a hatnote linking to X or to a disambiguation page with a link to X. Neither "domino toppling" nor "Domino's Pizzas" qualify by having the same common name as this article, but even if they did, a single hatnote to the disambiguation page is sufficient. Bermicourt (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Good point. We could organise the disambiguation page instead. That may be better and less cluttered. 107.184.63.8 (talk) 21:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Or, the hatnotes could be sorted by relevance, since one could link to disambiguation for random topics, and we could put domino toppling in as a hatnote, because this and the game of dominoes are somewhat linked closer than rock bands and whatnot?107.184.63.8 (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I think the issue I have is that, unless we can clearly demonstrate that "domino toppling" is commonly referred to as "dominoes", it doesn't warrant a hatnote according to the guidelines. Even if we could prove that, the guidelines state that linking to the dab page is acceptable. Bermicourt (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I mean, domino toppling is less ambiguous than the other popular topics(rock bands, singers, etc). That is why I wanted to sort the disambiguation page.107.184.63.8 (talk) 16:59, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

@ 107.184.63.8. You have a point. Domino toppling should not be at the bottom of the dab page in "Other uses". But the whole page looks like it needs restructuring. Bermicourt (talk) 17:23, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I think mentioning domino toppling up front is useful, as it is a popular use/ display of domino tiles, and this article talks about the tiles in depth. Instead of a hatnote, which isn't particularly suited in this case, I've added a line to the introduction. --Jonas kork (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I've done something similar at the dab page. How long it survives is another question. Bermicourt (talk) 17:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

So, should we redirect "dominos" to the pizza page?107.184.63.8 (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I suppose "Dominos" is not a word or name in English - the genitive (the company) needs an apostrophe, and the plural (the game) needs an "e". So we can redirect this spelling mistake to one of the topics that was likely intended, and make sure there's a hatnote that makes it easy to find other options. Or we can redirect to the disambiguation page - I actually think that would be the best choice.--Nø (talk) 12:12, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Looking at Google books Ngram Viewer, case-insensitively "domino's" and "dominos" are about even for recent books (though "domino's" was much more common than "dominos" in 1980), with "dominoes" being about 3x as popular overall, and "domino" being much more popular.

I think it might make sense to redirect Dominos to Domino's Pizza (to match Domino's), and add a hatnote to Domino's Pizza mentioning out both this page and the disambiguation page. --Pokechu22 (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

I suspect more people type 'dominos' in error meaning 'dominoes' rather than the other options, so sending them to the pizza brand will be circuitous for the majority. Bermicourt (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to repeat myself, byt I think Dominos should redirect to Domino (disambiguation).

And I think the two hatnotes here at Dominoes should be combined into one (again).--Nø (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

I suspect the opposite. 107.184.63.8 (talk) 17:29, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Fix the definition of "Dominoes" as a tile

The definition of dominoes in wikipedia is "Each domino is a rectangular tile with a line dividing its face into two square ends. Each end is marked with a number of spots (also called pips or dots) or is blank. The backs of the tiles in a set are indistinguishable, either blank or having some common design." I think that can be simplified to "Each domino is a plastic rectangular chip", and maybe also add in "in a 1:2 ratio".107.184.63.8 (talk) 17:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

There are lots of plastic rectangular chips that aren't dominoes and there are dominoes made of ivory, wood or other materials. I'm sure the ratio isn't always 1:2 either. I think it's also important to describe what a domino looks like i.e. there's always a dividing bar and the two ends are marked with pips unless blank. The backs are always uniform so that they can't be distinguished. Even the Cambridge Dictionary defines a domino as "one of a set of small rectangular pieces of wood or plastic marked with a particular number of spots on each half of one surface, used in playing a game" and, as an encylopaedia we can do better than that. Bermicourt (talk) 18:23, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

I guess we have here a discussion between the viewpoint that a domino is first and foremost a playing piece in the game of Dominoes, vs that it is an object of a certain shape, used for a variety of purposes (games, tiling, toppling, etc.) The object can be two-dimensional (see e.g. Domino (mathematics) or three-dimensional (as for toppling). -- It is not obvious to me which view is most appropriate (but I lean towards the original meaning, i.e. the game).--Nø (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably the "approximately 1:2 ratio" one, because it is more general, and perhaps not so biased as a definition(maybe not plastic... my bad) 107.184.63.8 (talk) 18:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Plus, maybe change the article name to Dominoes(game)? 107.184.63.8 (talk) 18:09, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

The primary topic for "Dominoes" is the tile game as the Cambridge Dictionary definition verifies. The other topics that we have been discussing not actually called "Dominoes" but "Domino xxxx", so there is no need to add a disambiguator to this article. The issue is simply how many hatnotes we need and that is being discussed above. Bermicourt (talk) 22:02, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

"no evidence" of link to China?

Regarding this, the entire "history" section is predicated on the obvious link to China, or else the discussion of "Chinese dominoes" would be off topic? I don't understand the point being made here? "Domino" refers to the 18th century game. It is clearly based indirectly on older Chinese tile games, but there is no clear evidence of a direct loan of any specific Chinese game. The topic here is the 18th century game. Possible Chinese predecessors are relevant, but they were (obviously) not named "domino" until much later. The term Chinese dominoes is a western umbrella term grouping all manners of Chinese tile games, based on the analogy to the western game of domino. Could you please explain how you came to the conclusion that there is "No evidence of a link" of the game of domino with China, all the while leaving in the discussion of early Chinese tile games? --dab (𒁳) 09:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The lede summarises what appears to be the scholarly position viz: "The earliest mention of dominoes is from Song dynasty China found in the text Former Events in Wulin by Zhou Mi (1232–1298).[1] Modern dominoes first appeared in Italy during the 18th century, but they differ from Chinese dominoes in a number of respects, and there is no confirmed link between the two. European dominoes may have developed independently, or Italian missionaries in China may have brought the game to Europe.[2]" This presumes that "dominoes" is an umbrella term that includes Chinese tile games/dominoes which also justifies the latter being included in the article.

On the other hand, do you know of any reliable sources that prove a link between the two? To do so, there either needs to be clear historical evidence that the game was brought to Europe from China and/or such similarity between the first European games and contemporary Chinese games that a link appears highly likely - as with early European playing cards and Egyptian Mamluk cards. And that connexion needs to be made by a WP:RS not by us mere Wikipedia editors. Cheers. Bermicourt (talk) 10:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 17 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved & speedy close. Unanimous opposition & consensus to move highly unlikely to develop. "Dominoes" is the correct spelling of the board game. Google Translate is unreliable, and this incorrect translation simply demonstrates that fact. (non-admin closure) Estar8806 (talk) 23:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

---

Dominoes → Dominos – Correct spelling of the board game. Google Translate says that correct translation is dominos, not dominoes. 2001:448A:11A8:11DB:FCA7:9447:478C:69D7 (talk) 13:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Google Translate is not a WP:RELIABLESOURCE. Meanwhile both the British English Cambridge Dictionary and the American English Merriam-Webster Dictionary give "dominoes" as the spelling with the latter listing "dominos" as an alternative. Meanwhile Ngram Viewer shows that the "dominoes" is still 4 times more common than "dominos". I'd leave it where it is. Bermicourt (talk) 13:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Correct translation of dominoes in Google Translate is dominos. That is the correct spelling, you know? 2001:448A:11A8:11DB:FCA7:9447:478C:69D7 (talk) 13:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm curious the pair of language you picked (from/to) and what exact input word you asked it to translate. Skynxnex (talk) 17:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per Bermicourt. 〜Festucalex • talk • contribs 15:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, Google Translate does not determine "correct" spelling. (Also, this is not a board game....) Dekimasuよ! 17:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lack of reading comprehension

The CIApedia article says: "Dominoes have sometimes been used for divination, such as bone throwing in Chinese culture and in the African diaspora."

The article however states the dominoes (the object) leads back to oracle bone in early China, not necessarily that modern dominoes are used for divination in China. And says that those who supposedly use dominoes for divination are Afro-Caribbeans, not Africans.

I can't edit this as I'm being persecuted on Wikipedia for apparently offending Anglo nationalists and their "western ethnicity" narrative as well as "hindus" and their "reliable sources millions of years old". Westernethinicity33 (talk) 18:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)