Comments by ChessShogi

Well, as I pointed out, it is not a matter of opinion. What is a better representation for playing a game is a verifyable fact, measurable by the average rating drop or raise people would get when having to play with one representation or another. E.g. representing all pieces by empty squares (aka blindfold chess) usually greatly degrades the rating of non-GM players, and can thus be considered an unsuitable representation for playing Chess.

And 'disagreeing with facts' is also known as 'being wrong'.

The pictograms are better at distinguishing the sides visually (e.g. the Mnemonic pieces for the large variants). However, Shogi uses Kanji pieces by tradition, and it has been this way even before the drop rule was added. Most Japanese players use this system, and even Western players (such as myself) have a tendency to use the kanji system as well. It doesn't take that long to learn and recognize the Kanji pieces.

The idea that Shogi and Chess would have different needs does seem rather inconsistent, as they are practically the same game. I have difficulty identifying any aspect of either game that would cause such a difference.

In theory they would be the same, but Shogi uses the drop rule, which by its nature necessitates a way to distinguish pieces that is not dependent on color.

Perhaps. Ideally, each piece should be easily distinguishable from the others.

Everything else looks good.

François Houdebert also made Shogi sprites for use in his Shogi jocly implementations that can easily be used for this site's Shogi and Mini Shogi implementations, although some minor tweaking may be needed for the promoted Lance/Knight/Silver.

Pawns only move orthogonally forward up to three cells per turn. They capture sidewise. 

The Bishop moves orthogonally forward and backwards any number of cells, but not sidewise.

Does this mean along any of the four non-sideways orthogonals for Bishops, and the two forward-facing orthogonals in the case of Pawns?

The Knight makes a 2+1 move. 

Is this the same as the Knight in Glinski's Hexagonal Chess? The current wording tells me nothing.

Can you include some images please (at the very least a setup diagram and matching piece images)?

Also, perhaps an introduction?

It's a rather novel take on the Chess experience, but it eventually devolves into Chess with more (enhanced) pieces, and no Pawns on a slightly larger board.

Nonetheless, the page is good enough to be approved

If two of your Wild Roses are in check (under attack), you win the game (blossom roses)

Leaving one of your Wild Roses under attack means you lose the game (rose cutting)

What happens if a win/loss condition based on leaving Roses in check occurs for both players at the same time?

Same en-passant question also applies to the Footer.

The new Tenjiku sprites look great. Can we also get similar versions for Chu Shogi, Shogi, and Mini Shogi?

Also, the new cache rule for jocly means we can fix the Two Pawns bug in Shogi and the Three Swallows bug in Tori Shogi (the former doesn't apply to Mini Shogi). If it involves switching lines, I could fix it right now for you, if you tell me which lines to swap.

All pawns are capable of en-passant capture (taking a piece, which’ve just moved two squares, by moving to square it have passed, if possible). But only half of pawns (F, P, A, S) can be taken by this way.

For en passant, I assume that the moving Pawn has to land on the square that was passed over? If so, how does the Warrior capture en passant, since it captures in the same way that the en-passant-capturable Pawns move?

I have approved this page, since it does what it needs to do and looks decent.
Personally, I would recommend making the 3-Tsarevna limit optional. Take it for what you will.

I guess technically this is a chess variant by that definition.

Unfortunately, only three player's Frogs per game can promote to Tsarevnas.

Do you mean to say here that only three Frogs per player can promote to Tsarevnas?

This rule is unnecessary in my opinion, as there is already a limit on how many Tsarevnas can be on the board at a time, and the piece that promotes to it, the Frog, cannot deliver checkmate by itself.

This looks significantly better in terms of covering all possible situations, save for the following:

• Clarifying the rules on the Pawn's double step that Reiniger mentioned
  • Does the double step for Pawns also apply to White Swans?
• A distinctive piece image for the Black Swan
• The movement of the Black Swan

There are other improvements that could be made as well, but these shouldn't really be a blocker to publication.

If a White Swan coming from the first rank gets flipped over on the second rank, it can be subject to capturing.

This should be in the Rules section in my opinion, if it is meant as a rule. You may want to be careful with this though, as you may encounter a problem with having to keep track of which White Swan started where, and thus which ones are able to be captured.

- By giving check to two of your opponent's Wild Roses at the same time, you win the game (checkmate)
- If two of your Wild Roses are in check (under attack), you win the game (blossom roses)

These seem to contradict each other. If you give check to two enemy Wild Roses, that fulfills the first condition for you, while fulfilling the second condition for your opponent at the same time. So who wins in this situation?

Also, like H. G. said, the promotion rules would benefit greatly from simply having a Pawn promote an enemy piece to an enemy Wild Rose and then ending the turn there.

I have approved this page.

Some of your wording could use some work, again owing to your Russian roots. However, the page does its job.

However, since the revisions and comments are in separate tables of the database, the ModifiedDate will probably not reflect the last action taken.

Just a thought, but would it be possible to list these two values separately? Perhaps this would give the Editors a better clue of the state of a page.