Talk:Muk-jji-ppa

Is Muk-Chi-Ba (the New York variation) really famous? A search with google only turns up Wikipedia and related websites. It seems likely to me that the creator of Muk-Chi-Ba is using wikipedia to promote their variation. -- Tlotoxl

• You are right that this game doesn't turn up on Google (at least when the keyword "New York" is added to the search), but local games like this are often spread by word-of-mouth. E.g. I remember Stupid Ninja Game was put up on VFD a while ago, but it was later proven to be not invented by the author. Anyway, this game is so hilarious it would be a crime to delete this article. --Shibboleth 08:00, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • I don't want to be a stick in the mud and I sorta hate myself for saying this, but I think that not publishing "original research" is one of Wikipedia's core policies. If Muk-Chi-Ba exists and is known in New York then this article is cool. If Muk-Chi-Ba only exists through the article, then the article is an abuse of Wikipedia, funny or not. The Stupid Ninja Game example suggests to me that Muk-Chi-Ba should be listed on the VFD so that its validity can be determined one way or the other (since the author doesn't seem interested in addressing the issue here). -- Tlotoxl 11:22, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • The author seems to not have been on Wikipedia recently, judging from his user page. Yeah, Google seems to really turn up nothing at all, although internal evidence in the article seems to indicate that the game is second-hand (e.g. "tingkwa," a word no doubt altered from its original pronunciation). Well, if you want to put it up for voting I don't have any real objections other than I like this game, so go ahead if you want to. I've at least saved a backup for personal use :). --Shibboleth 21:18, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • Neither can I find anything on this "New York City" version on Google except for a few other pages that copy the text verbatim. But as far as Muk-Chi-Ba (or as I heard it called, Muk-Chi-Pa) it is a game. The "addicting layer of complexity" mentioned in the New York version, is mistakenly referring to the complexity of Muk-Chi-Ba itself, when comparing it to Rock, Paper, Scissors. And the New York version seems to be mostly a cosmetic variation. So, I do say, New York version section should be deleted, and that seems to be the general consensus. --Apatterno 23:04, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • Don't know much about New York City, but a Google search for 묵찌빠 turns up more than 5000 hits, of which a good portion are related to the game. -- Visviva 04:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Muk-Chi-Ba is definately a real game (it seems like a traditional korean game) but i think whoever made up the "New York City" version is the one who wrote that though. However, they are wrong about there being an "aditional layer of play" added to that version. The "additional layer" exists in the original as well as the "New York City Version." I really think the whole NYC version thing should be deleted.

• • • I'm the author of the NYC variant section... first of all, I'd like to say I'm amazed at the attention to detail on Wikipedia, and the evolution in quality of this article is a good example of wikipedia's promise. I also appreciate the AGF ref below! I am a regular, low-frequency wikipedia contributor and I must say, I never understood what talk pages were and I imagine others like me don't either... this is the first talk post I ever made. I just read everyone's comments and I think you're collectively right, that the entry wasn't right for the page; I'm not the inventor of the variant, but I thought it would make sense to put it out there and I understand now that that's what external links are for. I agree with the immediately above comment that the NYC version isn't much of a variant; when I added it to the page, the "additional layer" wasn't mentioned. Now that I read the current version I see that the core concept is covered. Brw12 05:44, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Finally correct

The article, in its present state is a good representation of what Muk-Chi-Pa is. Muk-Chi-Pa is definitely an established Korean game. I think that the person who wrote the New York section was just a little confused (but assume good faith)... they wrote as if New York was a variation of Rock-Paper-Scissors, therefore incorporating all of the differences between Rock-Paper-Scissors and Muk-Chi-Pa. Without those differences, New York is no more than a cosmetic variation with a different priming method, and therefore not worth mentioning (unless we decide to mention the countless other cosmetic variations).

If there's one thing I might want to add, it would be my attempt to standardize Muk-Chi-Pa, but that's original research so I guess I shouldn't. --Apatterno 03:31, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Your efforts to improve the article are appreciated, but you need to cite some reliable sources. I could find nothing in Google Books, and the vast majority of web search results appear to be derived from this very page. In this unreliable source, the game is described as being rock-paper-scissors but played with the feet. As it stands this is no more or less reliable than the description in our article, so I'm reducing it to a stub until reliable sources can be found. The old version is here which can be used to look for supporting sources before it's restored. (btw I checked the Korean article for Korean-language sources but that doesn't have any either)--Pontificalibus (talk) 08:22, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

romanization

just wondering if anyone has any thoughts on the romanization of this article name. Appleby 18:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)