Double sharp

Chess opening What do you think of my revisions? Hoping to get some more input. Dayshade (talk) 20:42, 12 June 2026 (UTC) Taking a look now! Double sharp (talk) 13:12, 13 June 2026 (UTC) @Dayshade: Generally, I quite like it. Though again, it might be easier for others to follow if you did them in a sandbox first. :) A few thoughts: Regardless of White's choice, among the four common first moves, symmetrical replies (e.g. 1.e4 e5 or 1.d4 d5) along with defenses beginning with 1...c6 and 1...e6, often followed by the center thrust 2...d5, are common. Defenses with an early ...d6 coupled with a kingside fianchetto are also common. Not sure this is a good classification of the world of 1.d4 Nf6. Early ...d6 and ...g6 does describe the KID, but I guess the Nimzo-Bogo complex and the Grünfeld are common and not well-explained by this? I know you mention 1.d4 Nf6 as the most common asymmetrical response to 1.d4 later, but probably a little rewording would do. Is the Sicilian still more common than the Open Game? Lately in the World Championships it hasn't seemed so... (Is the Closed Sicilian with 2.Nc3 that uncommon now that you'd mention 2.c3 over it? Maybe I'm just out of date there.) (The Englund is actual trash, but OK. Still, if you're including it, I feel like the Albin deserves a mention as a plausible QG reply. The Chigorin too, perhaps. XD) Other than that, looks good. Now there's not a lot of heading-nesting. ;) Double sharp (talk) 14:48, 13 June 2026 (UTC) That sentence (btw I didn't write it) isn't referring specifically to 1.d4 Nf6, but rather that Black can always play 1...d6 or 1...g6 after any White first move and avoid pawn tension. 1.d4 players often will avoid transposing (e.g. via 2.e4 to e.g. 1.e4 d6 2.d4) since they think 1...d6/1...g6 players might be hoping for that. So maybe that paragraph could explicitly talk about how some of Black's first moves can be used to respond the same way to any of White's first moves, whereas 1...e5 and 1...c5, the two top replies to 1.e4, are rather (especially the englund lol) weak against 1.d4, while 1...d5 and 1...Nf6, the top two replies to 1.d4, are relatively weaker against 1.e4. And yes re 1...c5 but I could downplay it more cause yeah, I don't like when e.g. the sicilian gets pumped it to sound like it's just a better move than 1...e5, which isn't true. The Alapin is mentioned cause it has its own article and 2.Nc3 easily transposes to other lines, but actually did have it mentioned in an earlier version, should I put it back? I can add the other QG replies like the Albin, but there are WP:SS articles for Queen's Gambit and Closed Game so not sure if you still feel like it's better off mentioned. Dayshade (talk) 16:40, 13 June 2026 (UTC) Nomination of Tetraoctagonal tiling for deletion A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tetraoctagonal tiling is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tetraoctagonal tiling until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. Users may still edit the article, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the AfD notice from the article until the discussion is closed. SVG-image-maker (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Nomination of Truncated tetraoctagonal tiling and other articles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the following articles to which you have significantly contributed, are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted:

• Truncated tetraoctagonal tiling (authorship)
• Rhombitetraoctagonal tiling (authorship)

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tetraoctagonal tiling until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 14 June 2026 (UTC)