File talk:Sui Dynasty Go Board.jpg

17x17？

Shouldn't this say 17x17? Count the lines. There's 17. I don't think the stones are supposed to be placed on the edge of the board so they fall down, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PabloRomanH (talk • contribs) 19:19, 5 October 2017‎ (UTC)

It is 19x19, not 17x17. The description for this Go board in the museum (picture on the right) clearly states: "This Go board, with 19 vertical lines and 19 horizontal lines forming 361 crossing points, indicates that, at least in the Sui Dynasty, the 19-line Go board had already appeared." It was an original research to move File:19x19 Sui Dynasty Go Board.JPG to File:17x17 Sui Dynasty Go Board.jpg on 25 February 2018‎. This move should be reverted. And to avoid confusion and wrong move in the future, it's better to also remove "19x19" from the file title. So I suggest moving File:17x17 Sui Dynasty Go Board.jpg to simply File:Sui Dynasty Go Board.jpg. --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:26, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

If this is a 19x19 board, how would you play on the outermost lines? To me, it looks like that would be impossible as the stones would just fall off the board. Of course, this is in conflict with the claim on the sign (if the sign describes this board), but the sign could be wrong. It doesn't provide any explanation for how it was possible to play on the outermost lines when they clearly lack support for stones that you want to put there, which in my opinion makes it seem likely that the sign is wrong and that this is, in fact, a 17x17 board. —Kri (talk) 15:44, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of which, how do we know that the sign of which you provided a photo actually belongs to this board? In my opinion, either the sign describes a different go board than the one in the picture, or the information on the sign is dubious for the mentioned reason. —Kri (talk) 15:51, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Kri: I just saw your messages. Sorry for my late reply. Both File:Sui Dynasty Go Board.jpg and File:19x19 Sui Dynasty Go Board Label.JPG were uploaded on 4 May 2014 by User:Zcm11, who, as the author of these two pictures, describes this Go board model (from the tomb of Zhang Sheng) as 19×19 and uses the sign as the source. So apparently the uploader has clarified that the sign is for this Go board model. And this webpage of Henan Provincial Administration of Cultural Heritage provides two pictures of this Go board model (from the tomb of Zhang Sheng), and states that it is 19x19, not 17x17. This scholarly article in English (see p.2) also provides a picture of this Go board model and states: "A model of the Go board was excavated in 1959 from the tomb of Zhang Sheng at Anyang, Henan Province, with 19×19 lines that formed 361 crossing points, which can be dated from 595 A.D.". This scholarly article in Chinese (see p.46) states that this Go board model from the tomb of Zhang Sheng is the earliest 19x19 Go board discovered so far (隋开皇十五年(595)张盛墓中出土浅青色的白瓷棋盘1件，正方形，盘上纵横各刻直线19道，每个角的四四位置和中央各有一小孔，为星位的标志。盘体四周有壸门形装饰。此棋盘边长10.2、高4厘米，是迄今发现的最古老的十九道棋盘实物). If you think that 19x19 is wrong and it is actually 17x17, you have to provide reliable sources to support this argument. Otherwise it will be an original research. As for the outermost lines, please consider the fact that this is not a real Go board, but a model with very small size (10cm*10cm*4cm) used as grave goods. It's understandable that it is not as accurate as a real Go board. And please note that the vertical and horizontal lines intersect the outermost lines on this Go board model. If it is really 17x17, they should not intersect. --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:23, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Have you counted the lines on the board, or have you just read the texts? When I count the lines, I see 17 vertical lines and 17 horizontal lines, and that's it. I don't consider the edges of the board lines. Do you? If you put stones on them, they would just fall over the edge, so you wouldn't be able to play on them, even if you scaled up the board to proper size. Do you see my point? I'm not saying that you are wrong, but I'm having a hard time seeing why anyone, just from examining the model, would think it is a 19x19 board, especially when we know that 17x17 boards have existed (but perhaps not when this model was made?). The only way I can see to make this board playable as 19x19 is if you put some support outside the edge of the board to prevent stones from falling over so that the edges can be used as lines as well, which I don't think seems reasonable.

If the sign and the sources you have provided that claims that the board is a 19x19 board are correct, shouldn't there be some explanation for how it can be interpreted as a 19x19 board, since at least in my mind (and probably in many other people's minds), this board definitely looks like a 17x17 board? —Kri (talk) 19:21, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

@Kri: Again, I just saw your message. Sorry for my late reply. This webpage of Henan Provincial Administration of Cultural Heritage clearly states that the 19 lines of this Go board model include the 17 lines on it and the 2 edges (盘上纵横各刻17道直线，加上边线，纵横各19道). Of course, ideally there should be margins outside the outermost lines. However, as I put it, this is not a real Go board, but just a model with very small size (10cm*10cm*4cm) used as grave goods. It is not used for playing real games, and therefore no one needs to worry that stones would fall over the edge. And I have also said: "Please note that the vertical and horizontal lines intersect the outermost lines on this Go board model. If it is really 17x17, they should not intersect." Let me clarify what I mean. If this Go board model is really 17x17, its four edges should be like the top and left edges of the following image (i.e., the horizontal and vertical lines do not intersect the edges). But this Go board model's edges are not like the top and left edges of the following image, but are similar to the bottom and right edges of the following image (i.e., the horizontal and vertical lines intersect the edges). That means that the edges of this Go board model should be counted as lines of the Go board (Of course, because the bottom and right edges of the following image cut off half of the board's lines, these two edges should not be counted as lines of the board. But the length between the edge and the 17th line of this Go board model is the same as that between other adjacent lines, so the edges of this Go board model should be counted as lines of the Go board).

--Neo-Jay (talk) 16:56, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense; thanks for the explanation. I'm having trouble loading the web page you linked to, but I trust it says what you write it says. —Kri (talk) 18:04, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Kri: Thank you for your trust and the discussion. I just removed Template:Fact from the page. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)