Talk:Go professional

Keep or merge?[edit]

This article is silly. We should just integrate it into the Go (board game) entry (which already has half this content anyway) and delete it. --k.lee

Rather, it should be renamed to a more standard English entry such as professional Go play, with info from the overly large Go article incorporated. The Go article needs to be broken up. --The Cunctator

We should move it into the Go article if the subject page is unlikely to become much larger than it is currently.

However, I can see it expanded to contain a list of the major prizes, with current prize holders and brief bios of the major players. If this is done well, it would become large enough to justify its existence as a separate article.

In order to plan ahead, my vote would be to keep the subject page as it is. I also agree that the big Go article should be broken up. David 17:57 Oct 11, 2002 (UTC)

Just my 2c, I think it's a page that's needed (not only because I've linked to it externally). Sensei's Library, for example, has a lot of information and discussion about pros. It's part of the... culture of Internet go. And Hikaru no Go, which is how a lot of people recently have been introduced to go, is all about the pro scene (only a slight exaggeration). I don't too much mind the idea of changing the name to professional Go play as suggested by The Cunctator, but I feel personally that the core concept here is more about the professional Go scene than about the actual play of the game (after all, only the pros can really understand that). BenBildstein 10:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say the page should be kept, but updated and expanded with information about how the pro status is attained in different organisations. There is little or less information about that available in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.240.231.17 (talk) 08:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Go professional. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Go is not declining?[edit]

The last paragraph of the introduction states that go is on a decline. I think this should be deleted because if anything, the new AI has boosted the interest in Go. Samwri (talk) 22:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct. The source offered no support to this claim, so I've removed it. Mattpartridge24 (talk) 19:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]