Talk:Lexicon (card game)

Now it's a stub

After so much copied/pasted info was removed from the article—justifiably—it isn't start-class any longer. I've changed it to a stub and will add the appropriate template to the article.

http://www.gtoal.com/wordgames/rules/lexicon.html might be a good reference for the article, but do not copy & paste it here, as was done before. Thanks! — Geekdiva (talk) 03:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Notability tag

Does this article still warrant the {{notability}} tag? Is there something else that needs to be done to resolve the issues pertaining to that tag? Mindmatrix 15:08, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 04:53, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Master card for Waddingtons 1933 edition

• ... that for the 50th anniversary of the word game Lexicon, the publisher organised a Golden Jubilee weekend that included an alphabet soup dinner? Source: "There is even a Lexicon dinner dance with alphabet soup for starters!" at Weekend fun for word game fans
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/1970 Westminster Titans football team
  • Comment: Using second of three QPQs from reviewed articles; see my DYK tracker

5x expanded by Mindmatrix (talk). Self-nominated at 14:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lexicon (card game); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article 5x expanded, passes earwig and is adequately sourced. No close paraphrasing was found, and the hook is interesting, cited inline, and verified. Image is licensed under Creatives Commons and no copyright issues. QPQ done. Nom good to go. Pseud 14 (talk) 17:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)