Aside from the need for more pictures, any idea how to improve this article? Borisblue 03:43, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- It seems like some items that are not from the game need a reference. For instance there is no reference to justify the information about its popularity in South Korea. Barkeep49 16:51, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I'd say that was common knowledge. Falcon 04:48, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Still the article does need more citations to back up its claims if it is to become a feature article. Perhaps this press release might be helpful? Cedars 2 July 2005 02:46 (UTC)
- I'd say that was common knowledge. Falcon 04:48, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)
- It looks pretty comprehensive. Whatever isn't on this page appears to have been covered on the linked pages. But the description does suffer a bit from excessive praise. Statements such as "vast popularity" and "immensely successful" seem greatly over-inflated, IMO. It did well within it's market, but didn't exactly replace monopoly or chess. Most people have probably never heard of the game. So some of the descriptions seem a tad non-encyclopedic. :) — RJH 28 June 2005 14:37 (UTC)