Talk:Grail

"Haha, look at all these bad teams that couldn't answer a single tossup, most likely because their opponent was playing a tournament they should have known better than to enter in the first place!" If we're deleting pages that make quizbowl look bad and add no value this should be #1 on the list. Matt Weiner (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2020 (CST)

That's totally fair, I think it makes sense to remove the opponents at least and to add something along the lines of "if you are getting multiple grails at events, you might be playing on questions that are too easy for your team's level." Noted and I'll come back to look at this. --Chris Chiego

I've taken the liberty of adding more context to what a grail actually is to address these concerns. I also cut down on the bloat and overuse of linking. Some may find this controversial (if so, feel free to re-include), but I removed "near grails" from the page, as that seems to be mostly irrelevant, and could probably just go on a user's own page anyway. I kept the R. Hentzel thing because it's kinda funny, but otherwise just noting that you got 19 questions out of 20 seems to be exactly "add[ing] no value" and personal-record-keeping-esque (not that the team listing isn't too, but this is more egregious of that, IMO). I'd also add that if this page should go, so should "andrew hart grail" (not that most people call it that anymore, much less know that it is a thing). If this page is kept, it should use the tabular format that that page does, as it is easier to read. --Jack

Will probably commit to the sentiment described here and remove most things from this list - I think there are grails which are of note (in particular those occurring between strong teams at competitive tournaments, of which nationals would be paramount examples) but truly no one cares about it happening for the 50th time at a local tournament (not to mention other issues). I think it makes sense for there to be a note on the page that any additions to the page should be (ideally) discussed in this discussion page before being included in the main article. -Kevin Wang (talk) 21:31, 28 October 2021 (CDT)

Cut most of the entries. Tried to use reasonably objective criteria, though I bent it a few times to allow for examples which gave interesting context. -Kevin Wang (talk) 22:27, 28 October 2021 (CDT)