Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Within the last few months I finally got around to issuing 2 open invitations each to play this CV of mine and my (plainer) SOHO Chess, on Game Courier. Two different persons accepted one invite of just one CV or the other. The SOHO Chess game finished some time back.

Just my initial feeling, but I worry a bit that for Wide SOHO Chess (the present CV), the wizards might need to be monitored more carefully by the players, and the archbishops might be awkward for some time in the opening stage of a game (their presence in the setup also means getting castled, if desired, can take longer). This CV is maybe a future candidate for a rules enforcing preset.

I've added links to 4 existing PBM preset pages of mine onto the 4 rules pages submissions of mine approved tonight, in their Intro sections. Editor(s) can link the PBMs to the rules pages differently later, when they have time, if they wish.

Earlier, the week ending 13 Jan., I had seen someone's submissions approved where the statement was not added, and I'd thought it was not really required anymore on CVP site, if it ever was.

I guess the statement isn't truly necessary. since the majority of this site's members know how to play Chess, but it helps if you want to avoid ambiguity, especially for people who have never seen Chess or one of its variants before.

I have approved the four variants mentioned in my previous comment.

For what it's worth, another (unwritten on CVP?) caveat I think that might be used for rules pages, that is often written by authors, anyway, is namely something like '...other rules are as in orthodox chess'. I don't find that one particularly necessary, and I've seen many published rules pages (of varying ages) on CVP site where it has not been included (but might have been).

The Rules section on a rules page is often adequate, alone, at least for me, as there is the (written on CVP) assumption people know how to play chess, and unless the Rules section says otherwise, there is a good chance the author meant that 'other rules are as in orthodox chess', at least for square or rectangular board shapes. Even then, a stickler might say that chess never included Archbishop pieces and how they move, for example.

I've now added that statement about the 6 standard chess pieces into each of those four submissions. Earlier, the week ending 13 Jan., I had seen someone's submissions approved where the statement was not added, and I'd thought it was not really required anymore on CVP site, if it ever was.

I assume the orthodox pieces move as in standard Chess? If so, it would be beneficial to say that in the Pieces section. Same with SOHO Chess, Champagne Chess and Parity Chess.

To editors: just to be clear, I think this submission is ready.

To editors:

My intuition told me I ought to add a bit of content to the introductory section of this submission, and that of other remaining yet-to-be-approved ones (and the sooner the better). I think they are now all ready for review.

Note to editors:

I've done belated minor edits to this submission's and SOHO Chess' rules pages, partly mentioning that the CVs relate to each other. Now I think both are ready for review. [edit: made one more minor edit, at 9:26PM]

Note to editor(s):

I edited this rules page submission, and that of SOHO Chess', to include links about 5 CVs on CVP site, for reference, in the Notes sections - both submissions should be ready now, I think. [edit: just did a quick touch-up to SOHO Chess at 5:15PM]

Note to editors: I think this submission is ready.