22:
71:
53:
285:
Navboxes serve a very different purpose than categories. They're quick referral directories while categories are comprehensive (or should be). I'm in favor of not listing every marginal game or solution concept, but I want to know on what grounds we should include or exclude any individual item. ~
180:
I think the linkage between the AT and game theory is a bit tenuous, and especially there is nothing in the AT article that creates that linkage. So I'm not sure if we should leave it in, even though the list of theorems is pretty short as it is. ~
231:
I'd argue that this template should be drastically shortened or deleted. It is an eyesore on most articles, and it should only be a short list useful for an overview, most articles could simply be in categories.
260:
proper in context. Rm most articles in the "Games" box, only a few very representative ones should be there. Rm most equilibria too, leave a few to give the reader an idea.
468:
564:
507:
327:
313:
304:
290:
280:
251:
591:
581:
somehow), but I think it is not at all helpful that they are all mixed up with other games. Does anybody want to subdivide this part of the box?
539:
218:
201:
519:, which we list here under "classes of games". Do these really differ such that we need separate entries, and if not, which should we keep?
143:
and I don't think there is much more to be said. If there is enough to warrant an article, I'd be happy to add it back in. --best, kevin
101:
389:
611:
93:
97:
89:
362:
447:
606:
185:
502:
472:
350:
to the template. I don't even know if the article is valid or not, but if it is, it needs to be added since it's almost an
464:
247:
Any suggestions on how to shorten it, in particular on how to create a feasible inclusion guideline for future articles? ~
433:
428:
241:
559:
407:? Anyway, I'm thinking to remove it, since it's not really a solution concept (unless I'm missing something), and the
78:
58:
497:
167:
341:
424:
385:
192:
535:
211:
33:
457:
Perhaps we should link to articles on some of the established game theorists - Nash, von
Neumann, etc.
172:
478:
578:
395:
323:
300:
276:
237:
207:
139:
I removed existence of NE from the list of theorems. There is already a sketch of the proof at
574:
566:
546:
452:
404:
347:
359:
39:
523:
512:
493:
460:
319:
310:
296:
287:
272:
264:
248:
233:
215:
182:
8:
587:
516:
484:
403:
is listed as a solution concept. I guess that's because it's sometimes used as part of
156:
420:
408:
400:
381:
531:
355:
351:
226:
173:
140:
134:
488:
443:
267:
has good categories, and then delete this template, and write a good overview at
82:, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Knowledge's articles related to
600:
583:
556:
552:
487:
or is the format incorrect for "game theory" since there is only one player?
369:
152:
412:
373:
527:
268:
257:
83:
295:
Well, keeping the several most representative items only could be good.
439:
70:
52:
191:
Yeah, that's definitely on the border of game theory. Perhaps
256:
For example, rm the "related topics" box, that should be in
551:
Repeated games are mentioned on the template—shouldn't
195:
is closer, but even that isn't exactly game theory. --
411:
article isn't currently helpful in providing context.
515:, listed here under "games", links to a redirect to
372:thing, so I pointed that project at the article.
598:
577:belong here at all (or under something like
508:Bargaining problem vs. Nash bargaining game
32:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
599:
21:
19:
438:I removed the second link for it. --
15:
38:It is of interest to the following
13:
612:NA-importance game theory articles
14:
623:
110:Knowledge:WikiProject Game theory
346:Someone ought to look at adding
214:but at best maginally notable ~
113:Template:WikiProject Game theory
69:
51:
20:
1:
607:NA-Class game theory articles
503:17:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
429:20:00, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
390:19:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
219:20:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
202:06:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
193:Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem
186:03:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
560:20:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
212:List of games in game theory
206:I took it off, and also the
168:02:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
7:
592:21:24, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
540:07:00, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
448:22:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
434:Signaling game listed twice
328:16:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
314:15:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
305:01:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
291:17:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
281:04:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
252:22:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
242:21:07, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
10:
628:
473:18:57, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
579:combinatorial game theory
363:13:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
309:OK, ready to weed out? ~
210:link, which is listed at
76:This template is part of
64:
46:
208:Guess 2/3 of the average
575:abstract strategy games
567:abstract strategy games
483:Can we include the the
263:Simpler yet, make sure
79:WikiProject Game theory
573:I am not sure whether
405:equilibrium refinement
348:dynamic game balancing
342:Dynamic game balancing
86:. We need your help!
513:Nash bargaining game
265:Category:Game theory
116:game theory articles
555:also be included? —
517:bargaining problem
485:Monty Hall problem
479:Monty Hall problem
318:Sure I am .... :)
34:content assessment
543:
526:comment added by
501:
463:comment added by
416:
409:Pareto efficiency
401:Pareto efficiency
396:Pareto efficiency
377:
368:That's more of a
159:
132:
131:
128:
127:
124:
123:
104:
619:
542:
520:
491:
475:
414:
375:
166:
163:
151:
149:
146:
141:Nash equilibrium
118:
117:
114:
111:
108:
88:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
47:
25:
24:
23:
16:
627:
626:
622:
621:
620:
618:
617:
616:
597:
596:
571:
549:
521:
510:
481:
458:
455:
436:
398:
344:
320:Oleg Alexandrov
311:trialsanderrors
297:Oleg Alexandrov
288:trialsanderrors
273:Oleg Alexandrov
249:trialsanderrors
234:Oleg Alexandrov
229:
216:trialsanderrors
183:trialsanderrors
178:
174:Arrow's Theorem
164:
161:
147:
144:
137:
115:
112:
109:
106:
105:
12:
11:
5:
625:
615:
614:
609:
570:
563:
553:n-player games
548:
547:n-player games
545:
509:
506:
480:
477:
465:129.67.160.200
454:
453:Game Theorists
451:
435:
432:
397:
394:
393:
392:
343:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
307:
261:
228:
225:
224:
223:
222:
221:
177:
171:
136:
133:
130:
129:
126:
125:
122:
121:
119:
94:Fix a red link
87:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
624:
613:
610:
608:
605:
604:
602:
595:
594:
593:
589:
585:
580:
576:
568:
562:
561:
558:
554:
544:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
518:
514:
505:
504:
499:
495:
490:
486:
476:
474:
470:
466:
462:
450:
449:
445:
441:
431:
430:
426:
422:
418:
410:
406:
402:
391:
387:
383:
379:
371:
370:computer game
367:
366:
365:
364:
361:
357:
354:right now. —
353:
349:
329:
325:
321:
317:
316:
315:
312:
308:
306:
302:
298:
294:
293:
292:
289:
284:
283:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
259:
255:
254:
253:
250:
246:
245:
244:
243:
239:
235:
220:
217:
213:
209:
205:
204:
203:
200:
198:
194:
190:
189:
188:
187:
184:
175:
170:
169:
158:
154:
142:
120:
103:
99:
95:
91:
85:
81:
80:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
49:
45:
41:
35:
31:
27:
18:
17:
582:
572:
550:
522:— Preceding
511:
482:
456:
437:
399:
345:
230:
199:
196:
179:
138:
77:
40:WikiProjects
29:
569:from others
459:—Preceding
356:Frecklefσσt
269:Game theory
258:Game theory
197:best, kevin
107:Game theory
98:Add content
84:Game theory
59:Game theory
601:Categories
489:JamesLucas
565:Separate
584:PJTraill
557:Perceval
536:contribs
524:unsigned
461:unsigned
227:Too long
153:Kzollman
135:Theorems
102:Weigh in
30:template
90:Join in
528:MacMog
352:orphan
36:scale.
440:Rajah
415:RETOG
376:RETOG
28:This
588:talk
532:talk
469:talk
444:talk
360:Talk
324:talk
301:talk
277:talk
238:talk
157:Talk
494:" "
603::
590:)
538:)
534:•
496:/
471:)
446:)
427:)
388:)
358:|
326:)
303:)
279:)
271:.
240:)
155:|
100:|
96:|
92:|
586:(
530:(
500:)
498:+
492:(
467:(
442:(
425:c
423:/
421:t
419:(
417:8
413:C
386:c
384:/
382:t
380:(
378:8
374:C
322:(
299:(
275:(
236:(
176:?
165:·
162:·
160:·
150:·
148:·
145:·
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
