Template talk:Tarot and Tarock card games

Tarot and Tarock

This template appears to draw a distinction between "Tarot games" and "Tarock games". These phrases mean the same, but use different languages. Readers are likely to think that the former are played by French speakers and the latter by German speakers; or that the former are played with French-suited packs and that latter with German-suited packs. In fact, I think the distinction being made is:

• in "Tarot games", the the Fool is used as an 'excuse'
• in "Tarock games", the the Fool is the highest trump

Anyway, the distinction needs to be made clear somewhere, maybe on this talk page, or maybe in the sections linked to from the template. Maproom (talk) 18:02, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

It's a fair point, although Parlett certainly talks about "Tarot and tarock games". I've been discussing the distinction with Countakeshi. The only formal classification I know of is Dummett's Types I, II and III. Type I are the ones where there are other trumps with values >1, a group dominated by Italian Tarocchi games; Type II use the Fool as an 'excuse'; the best known/widest played example is probably French Tarot; and Type III use the Fool as the top trump; they are dominated by Austro-German-Hungarian games mostly referred to as Tarock or Tarokk. So I'm thinking of redrafting the template using Type I, II and III instead of just using "Tarot games" and "Tarock games" which would more tightly define them all. Bermicourt (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, so I've re-organised them by Types I-III, but would appreciate a sanity check to make sure they've gone into the right categories. I don't have Dummett's massive tomes, so am going from secondary information and the type definitions themselves. Bermicourt (talk) 20:03, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

It's still misleading. It would be best to drop any national or cultural associations with each group. Type II games descend from a Milanese game which of course is called "tarocchi" in their native language. Scarto, Droggn, etc. are related to French tarot only through their shared descent from the Milanese game and have nothing to do with France. Großtarock, is a type II game.--Countakeshi (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Just calling them Type I, II and III won't help the average viewer since they won't be familiar with Dummett and the intricacies of Fool usage, so it will mean nothing. It might just be better to classify them by deck (e.g. Industrie & Glück, Tarot Nouveau, Bolognese, 'Special'), by the number of cards used (54, 78 and 'other') or by region of origin. Since 9 are Austrian, 3 are Italian, 3 Swiss, 2 German, 1 French and 1 Hungarian, and I suspect the number of Italian tarots will increase, we could have Austrian, Italian, Swiss/German and 'Other', for example. Bermicourt (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

This is why I suggest splitting them into two categories: "Fool as excuse" and "Fool as highest trump". It's much simpler. Dummett and McLeod recorded around 230 tarot games, some of which are transnational or played with a variety of decks or have a variable number of cards due to the number of players. Countakeshi (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

So that covers Types II and III. We currently have two Type I games that are linked, both appear to be "Fool as excuse" so could be absorbed into that category. Bermicourt (talk) 16:24, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Formatting edits

@Randy Kryn: help me understand why you've reverted my recent edit by making the navbox taller again when I was just trying to make it more compact, and then, curiously, made the image smaller even though the box is larger. Oh, and I'm also not sure why you've removed the link to the game of Sansprendre, a variant of German Tarok. Bermicourt (talk) 14:20, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

My edits made it shorter and more compact (on my screen now 15 lines compared to your 20). Am I missing something, how do you see the box as larger? Sansprendre was a link to German Tarok and an alternate name for it so already listed. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:46, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

By inserting two carriage returns after Type I/II and Type III, you made the box is deeper/higher than before (back to where it was before my earlier edits), yet you made the image smaller. Don't get me wrong - it's not a biggy - these things are largely subjective. I was just surprised to have my edits changed so soon after making them, but I'm happy to leave it. Bermicourt (talk) 15:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Added two section breaks, which should be only one line each which corresponds with the lines of the sections (unless you have a very wide screen). On my screen the overall navbox lines are now reduced from 20 to 15, how many lines on yours? Generally sizing on screens differs considerably. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:17, 20 March 2022 (UTC)