The Great War

[Dukasaur]

Is it copy-righted?


I ask because Im hopefully getting into teaching and if so will probably be involved in History and English lessons. - The above would serve rather well as reading material. Its fairly short, fairly recent and while the lix-number is probably high for a second language class even with older pupils, extra time, group work and/or a provided vocabulary should work.

A bit of snipping would of course be required with regards to the tournament and cc-references. - So hmmm could I borrow from it if the situation arises and if so, what name should I credit?

Much of the material is quoted from wikipedia, as are most of the graphics.

The original parts are mine. I don't mind you borrowing it. You can PM me for my real name if you want to attribute it. Probably right to set a good example for the students and make proper footnotes...

[Dukasaur]

Archive of tournaments in the Seventh Quarter of the War.

show: kosovo offensive april 5 to 12

show: evacuation of gallipoli

show: the fokker scourge

show: the Armenian Genocide

back to main index


There were only four new tournaments launched in the 7th quarter, by far my lowest production since the start of this project. I will try very hard to do better in the 8th.

A new tournament about the Battle of Sheikh Saad launches later today.

[Dukasaur]

Ready to go when the Olympics are over:

show: battle of the wadi

[notyou2]

In please

[Symmetry]

Is it copy-righted?


I ask because Im hopefully getting into teaching and if so will probably be involved in History and English lessons. - The above would serve rather well as reading material. Its fairly short, fairly recent and while the lix-number is probably high for a second language class even with older pupils, extra time, group work and/or a provided vocabulary should work.

A bit of snipping would of course be required with regards to the tournament and cc-references. - So hmmm could I borrow from it if the situation arises and if so, what name should I credit?

Much of the material is quoted from wikipedia, as are most of the graphics.

The original parts are mine. I don't mind you borrowing it. You can PM me for my real name if you want to attribute it. Probably right to set a good example for the students and make proper footnotes...

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

[Dukasaur]

Is it copy-righted?


I ask because Im hopefully getting into teaching and if so will probably be involved in History and English lessons. - The above would serve rather well as reading material. Its fairly short, fairly recent and while the lix-number is probably high for a second language class even with older pupils, extra time, group work and/or a provided vocabulary should work.

A bit of snipping would of course be required with regards to the tournament and cc-references. - So hmmm could I borrow from it if the situation arises and if so, what name should I credit?

Much of the material is quoted from wikipedia, as are most of the graphics.

The original parts are mine. I don't mind you borrowing it. You can PM me for my real name if you want to attribute it. Probably right to set a good example for the students and make proper footnotes...

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

[Dukasaur]

Finally, a new tournament in the series:

show: Battle of Hanna

[Dukasaur]

I have been asked again about the helmet prizes being given to players who end in various positions.

The current policy is this. Two helmets are given out in every tournament. One goes to the first-place player. The other is given to a player finishing in a randomly-chosen non-winning position.

The history of this is as follows. First, there was pamoa's suggestion to give participation ribbons of some kind to everyone who plays in one of these tournaments. For several reasons, I decided against that. I did, however, start randomly choosing one non-winning position per tournament to get a helmet as a kind of random bonus.

When the tournament description says that a helmet is given for 18th place or whatever, it only means 18th place. It does NOT mean all places up to and including 18th. This is a quasi-random participation bonus.

[ConfederateSS]

-----I joined The Battle of Hanna ...won one game out of three...Does not look like I will advance to the next round...I went to TGW Icon...It still has The Battle of Hanna up(A new set of players has been put up)...Am I allowed to join again in this part of the War?...Thank You Kindly, ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[Dukasaur]

-----I joined The Battle of Hanna ...won one game out of three...Does not look like I will advance to the next round...I went to TGW Icon...It still has The Battle of Hanna up(A new set of players has been put up)...Am I allowed to join again in this part of the War?...Thank You Kindly, ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

No, only one chance at each Battle.... but I'll have a new battle up in a day or two....

[Symmetry]

Is it copy-righted?


I ask because Im hopefully getting into teaching and if so will probably be involved in History and English lessons. - The above would serve rather well as reading material. Its fairly short, fairly recent and while the lix-number is probably high for a second language class even with older pupils, extra time, group work and/or a provided vocabulary should work.

A bit of snipping would of course be required with regards to the tournament and cc-references. - So hmmm could I borrow from it if the situation arises and if so, what name should I credit?

Much of the material is quoted from wikipedia, as are most of the graphics.

The original parts are mine. I don't mind you borrowing it. You can PM me for my real name if you want to attribute it. Probably right to set a good example for the students and make proper footnotes...

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

Was any of it your own research?

[Dukasaur]

Is it copy-righted?


I ask because Im hopefully getting into teaching and if so will probably be involved in History and English lessons. - The above would serve rather well as reading material. Its fairly short, fairly recent and while the lix-number is probably high for a second language class even with older pupils, extra time, group work and/or a provided vocabulary should work.

A bit of snipping would of course be required with regards to the tournament and cc-references. - So hmmm could I borrow from it if the situation arises and if so, what name should I credit?

Much of the material is quoted from wikipedia, as are most of the graphics.

The original parts are mine. I don't mind you borrowing it. You can PM me for my real name if you want to attribute it. Probably right to set a good example for the students and make proper footnotes...

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

Was any of it your own research?

No, of course not.

[Symmetry]

Is it copy-righted?


I ask because Im hopefully getting into teaching and if so will probably be involved in History and English lessons. - The above would serve rather well as reading material. Its fairly short, fairly recent and while the lix-number is probably high for a second language class even with older pupils, extra time, group work and/or a provided vocabulary should work.

A bit of snipping would of course be required with regards to the tournament and cc-references. - So hmmm could I borrow from it if the situation arises and if so, what name should I credit?

Much of the material is quoted from wikipedia, as are most of the graphics.

The original parts are mine. I don't mind you borrowing it. You can PM me for my real name if you want to attribute it. Probably right to set a good example for the students and make proper footnotes...

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

Was any of it your own research?

No, of course not.

Then why the kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research? If you're legitimately refeferring to historians, just give them a heads up, and say that you're using their research.

Sorry dude, but passing off work done by others as your own is kinda shitty as historical research.

[Dukasaur]

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

Was any of it your own research?

No, of course not.

Then why the kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research? If you're legitimately refeferring to historians, just give them a heads up, and say that you're using their research.

Sorry dude, but passing off work done by others as your own is kinda shitty as historical research.

There was no kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research. Nobody is claiming to be doing any research here. Some of the writing is original, but all of it is based on previous sources. When I can, I try to do some original writing for each tournament, but much of it is just linked to wikipedia and/or firstworldwar.com or other history sites. They are always linked and cited.

Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it does a reasonably good job of properly attributing things, and of course it gets better over time.

[Symmetry]

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

Was any of it your own research?

No, of course not.

Then why the kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research? If you're legitimately refeferring to historians, just give them a heads up, and say that you're using their research.

Sorry dude, but passing off work done by others as your own is kinda shitty as historical research.

There was no kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research. Nobody is claiming to be doing any research here. Some of the writing is original, but all of it is based on previous sources. When I can, I try to do some original writing for each tournament, but much of it is just linked to wikipedia and/or firstworldwar.com or other history sites. They are always linked and cited.

Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it does a reasonably good job of properly attributing things, and of course it gets better over time.

Thank goodness there's no kerfuffle.

Seriously though- do try to credit the historians you plagiarise in future. Just because you trust a dude called donkeypunch69 on wikipedia, doesn't make it an accurate source

[mookiemcgee]

Plagiarism is a tough issue. Wiki is particularly poor about this. Wiki tends to plagiarise stuff on the grounds that it it's out of copyright. You would be very foolish to treat Wikipedia as a reliable source on tgose grounds

Writing a complete history of the Great War from scratch is a ten-year project for a professional historian. For someone volunteering part-time, it's utterly impossible. Of necessity, I have to rely on wikipedia and firstworldwar.com for the bulk of the prose, so that what time I have available can be devoted to the actual design and coding of the tournaments. They may not be the greatest sources, but they're a lot better than nothing.

Was any of it your own research?

No, of course not.

Then why the kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research? If you're legitimately refeferring to historians, just give them a heads up, and say that you're using their research.

Sorry dude, but passing off work done by others as your own is kinda shitty as historical research.

There was no kerfuffle about how difficult it is to do research. Nobody is claiming to be doing any research here. Some of the writing is original, but all of it is based on previous sources. When I can, I try to do some original writing for each tournament, but much of it is just linked to wikipedia and/or firstworldwar.com or other history sites. They are always linked and cited.

Wikipedia may not be perfect, but it does a reasonably good job of properly attributing things, and of course it gets better over time.

Thank goodness there's no kerfuffle.

Seriously though- do try to credit the historians you plagiarise in future. Just because you trust a dude called donkeypunch69 on wikipedia, doesn't make it an accurate source

Why are you trying to cause a kurfuffle DSIOV? Until you actually join a great war tourney series or actually play the game, you should probably shut up as you have no place in this discussion.

Or would you rather we delay playing our game here on this site for a few years so Duku can take some time away to research and write a book or two of his own about the war so he can come into this more prepared next time and won't have to rely on the research of others? That way he won't offend any douchebag trolls who start shit over nothing because he/she/it... is bored.

[MellonWar!]

Do you have to be a premium member to join?

[Dukasaur]

Do you have to be a premium member to join?

Each tournament has it's own rules. Probably 85% or so are premium-only, but some allow freemies.

[gigi_b]

Man what are you writing about?!?
Dukasaur is as genuine and original and as it gets!

Look...one example: The Battle of Loos took place between 25th of sep and 15 of oct 1915..ok?
Now Dukasaur's tournament for the same event (or at least my iteration) started 15th of oct 2015. Now we're on 28th of oct 2016, so 1 year and 2 weeks in and we're midway round 6 of 17...that's roughly 16 games out of 53. At this pace Duka's Battle of Loss would hold for at least 3 years (or 2 years from this point): beat that historians!

[Dukasaur]

Man what are you writing about?!?
Dukasaur is as genuine and original and as it gets!

Look...one example: The Battle of Loos took place between 25th of sep and 15 of oct 1915..ok?
Now Dukasaur's tournament for the same event (or at least my iteration) started 15th of oct 2015. Now we're on 28th of oct 2016, so 1 year and 2 weeks in and we're midway round 6 of 17...that's roughly 16 games out of 53. At this pace Duka's Battle of Loss would hold for at least 3 years (or 2 years from this point): beat that historians!

Sorry about the long delays. Been a hectic time for me. I really will write some new tournaments soon. I'm hoping by November 2nd to have something up.

[macbone]

Thank goodness there's no kerfuffle.

Seriously though- do try to credit the historians you plagiarise in future. Just because you trust a dude called donkeypunch69 on wikipedia, doesn't make it an accurate source

Symm, the sources are in the Wikipedia page. It would be tedious to include every single secondary citation for the purpose of a forum post giving background information on a tournament on a gaming site focusing on iterations of the board game Risk. He's not claiming original research, and he's providing links. I mean, bro, do you even Wikipedia?

Here's one set for the Armenian massacre from the Wikipedia page:

Adalian, Rouben Paul (2010). Historical Dictionary of Armenia (2 ed.). Scarecrow Press. p. 337. ISBN 978-0810874503.

Barsoumian, Hagop (1982), "The Dual Role of the Armenian Amira Class within the Ottoman Government and the Armenian Millet (1750–1850)", in Braude, Benjamin; Lewis, Bernard, Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of a Plural Society, I, New York: Holmes & Meier.

Barsoumian, Hagop (1997), "The Eastern Question and the Tanzimat Era", in Hovannisian, Richard G, The Armenian People From Ancient to Modern Times, II: Foreign Dominion to Statehood: The Fifteenth Century to the Twentieth Century, New York: St. Martin's, pp. 175–201, ISBN 0-312-10168-6.

(Armenian) Hambaryan, Azat S. (1981). "Հայաստանի սոցիալ-տնտեսական և քաղաքական դրությունը 1870-1900 թթ." [Armenia's social-economic and political situation, 1870-1900] in Հայ Ժողովրդի Պատմություն [History of the Armenian People], ed. Tsatur Aghayan et al. Yerevan: Armenian Academy of Sciences, vol. 6, p. 22.

A ́goston, Ga ́bor; Alan Masters, Bruce (2010). Encyclopedia of the Ottoman Empire. Infobase Publishing. pp. 185–6. ISBN 978-1-4381-1025-7. Retrieved 15 April 2016.

Balakian, Peter (2003). The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America's Response. New York: HarperCollins. pp. 25, 445. ISBN 0-06-019840-0.

Ramsay, W.M. (1897). Impressions of Turkey during Twelve Years' Wanderings. London: Hodder and Stoughton. pp. 206–207.

Akçam, Taner (2006). A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility. New York: Metropolitan Books. ISBN 0-8050-7932-7.

Etc., etc. It's all in the footnotes in the Wikipedia article.

Of course you and I wouldn't accept something like this for a student essay, or something published in an organization's newsletter, but requiring citations for forum posts? That's a bit of a stretch. I doubt even the editors at the APA and MLA style manuals would go that far.

[Symmetry]

I don't really want to keep going on about this, but if you're going to use research done by other people, acknowledging their work isn't really all that difficult, or onerous. Passing it off as your own work when people are paying for it? That seems a bit wrong to me.

[Dukasaur]

I don't really want to keep going on about this, but if you're going to use research done by other people, acknowledging their work isn't really all that difficult, or onerous. Passing it off as your own work when people are paying for it? That seems a bit wrong to me.

Rather than talk in generalities, please point to a specific example of something that you feel was passed off as someone's own work.

[Dukasaur]

A new Great War tourney begins today!

show: Le Mort-Homme

[Symmetry]

I don't really want to keep going on about this, but if you're going to use research done by other people, acknowledging their work isn't really all that difficult, or onerous. Passing it off as your own work when people are paying for it? That seems a bit wrong to me.

Rather than talk in generalities, please point to a specific example of something that you feel was passed off as someone's own work.

I simply think that the historians who did the groundwork deserve a bit of credit. Are you really asking me to do your work for you?