text:
Talk:Nexus

other meanings
I've seen "nexus" used in two other contexts: state tax jurisdiction and Henry Miller's book of that title. Can these be discussed, and where does the word itself come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.107.160.150 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 30 July 2003
 * - Is it answered now ? However I didn't know anything about state tax nexus.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.14.160.189 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 1 December 2003
 * Nexus in terms of state tax jursidictions deals with whether or not a given company is taxable in a certain state based on differing variables. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.240.171 (talk) 04:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

There's also the group of planets linked together in Lois Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan series which has been adopted as the name for the official fan web-site. Not clear whether this is the formal name in the books or not (away from books ATM). Phil 16:08, Jan 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've bitten the bullet and added it. Phil 15:05, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)

An anonymous user added the following:
 * A geological point at which is equally distant from the five Elements (Fire, Water, Rock, Wood, and Metal).

I can find no independent justification for this; indeed I find myself in difficulty deciphering exactly what it is intended to mean (metal is an element?). I have therefore moved it here in the hope that someone can either justify it or kill it stone-dead. --Phil | Talk 14:20, May 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * I have no idea about the meaning,but it seems that "geographical point" is center(nexus) of circle of classical elements.It may imply balance,middle point or something else(like conglomerate of elements).classical elements are purely philosophical constructs,convienient categories which don't correlate to science. See Classical_element — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.126.120 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 12 May 2006

another game
Nexus was used for another game name, in 1998 one of the last Sega Saturn games Japan only. a Game call "Dungeon Master Nexus" is a 3d version of the Game serries Dungeon Master. which has spawned 4 games under the DM name and a 5th being a prequal to the serries. As I recall DM Nexus puts you in charge of entering this dungeon to find this "nexus" stone and free a good wizard from an evil spell. Seems to be almost completely based from the first game: Dungeon Master. Dungeon Master Nexus Information - The Dungeon Master & Chaos Strikes Back Encyclopaedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.167.85 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 20 June 2004

Redirect
Unless someone can provide us with an argument to the contrary, it makes more sense for the 'The Nexus' article to redirect to the 'Nexus' article rather than the reverse. 24.202.107.232 21:16, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sorting
The list of uses is getting pretty long now, might it be an idea to sort the entries into groups somehow? Perhaps Thryduulf 23:38, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) historic uses
 * 2) uses in games
 * 3) uses in fiction
 * 4) other uses

Strategic nexus
Strategic Nexus - a focal point which is instrumental in linking various parties, and creates sigificant benefit for one or more of them in the process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrickFernandez (talk • contribs) 13:16, 16 October 2005

PLAIN SIGHT
Any reason "plain sight" is in caps, quotes, and surrounded by extraneous spaces? Shouldn't it just be ..."plain sight"... ? Buddy13 21:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've removed the "In Government" section entirely, as it was badly written and appeared to be mostly speculation worthy of conspiricy theorists ("get out of jail free cards"). It was also wrongly titled (should have been "In government") and in the wrong place (should have been sorted alphabetically).Thryduulf 23:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

terminal server
Nexus is the name of the Terminal server at AISM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.46.6.190 (talk) 18:12, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nexus


text:
Talk:Hypnerotomachia Poliphili

common symbolism?
I read that there was some common symbolism with Phileas Fogg from Around the World in Eighty Days. Something about the esoteric (Masonic?) leanings of Jules Verne. Confirmation? -- Error

 * I have never heard of this; it is certainly not impossible. I would have thought Verne to have been more of a rationalist, but he does use such devices as Runic cyphers and similarly esoteric themes.  -- IHCOYC 03:43, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * Oh no. There are some more symbolism. Robur the Conqueror (R.C.) and Rosicrucians. Something about Clovis Dardentor and L'ardent or de Clovis (old treasure at Rennes le Chateau). He seemed to like esoteric references. -- Error 04:06, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Added section
Added section on the the Hypnerotomachia in other fiction. I've started with John Crowley's Love and Sleep -- there's no conspiracy about the connection there -- User:jhbadger

parallels
Has anyone noticed any parallels between the Hypnerotomachia and the apocryphal Book of Enoch? Something about the way the text describes poliphilo's meanderings and observations reminds me of it somewhat. I haven't read very much of the Hypnerotomachia yet but it was something that struck me initially. Something about the mysterious place that he wanders to also gives me the notion that he has somehow discovered the lost continent of Atlantis. I thought maybe others have had this feeling too or perhaps had read the Book of Enoch and had noticed any parallels.

Alberto Pérez-Gómez wrote a 1992 contemporary retelling of the Hypnerotomachia that he entitled "Polyphilo or The Dark Forest Revisited - An Erotic Epiphany of Architecture" - a reference to MIT press webpage: http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=8942 the book is currently shown as out of print. M9 00:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

takes place at Princeton
The Rule of Four takes place at Princeton, not Yale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.10.163.30 (talk • contribs)
 * That was vandalism edit made a day before your comment. Check the edit history if you see anything suspicious or utterly ridiculous next time - most likely it's an unspotted vandalism edit. Aran|heru|nar 09:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Side Çiçekçi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.96.172 (talk) 19:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

suggestion on point 5.5
I wanted to make a suggestion on point 5.5: Gypnerotomahiya (animation) Occasionally in Russian, the G letter Г is actually pronouced as a H, thus making this Hypnerotomahiya - as is also shown on the link provided: (And it's, of course, in keeping with the original title.) Thanks. --khrystene (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

New edit for plot summary
After seeing a dead wikipedia link and considering the overall synopsis, I edited one of the words to be "erotomania" as opposed to "erotomachia". Cassius235 (talk) 15:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Hypnerotomachia Poliphili. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160105055258/http://www.mirroroftheworld.com.au/inspiration/printed/hypnerotomachia.php to http://www.mirroroftheworld.com.au/inspiration/printed/hypnerotomachia.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hypnerotomachia Poliphili. 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:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130629114929/http://www.hp1499.com/about.html to http://www.hp1499.com/about.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:23, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Symbolism of the Hypnerotomachia
The rule of four puts the hypnerotomachia in a way that it seems to be a puzzle. Is it just fiction or has the crypt been found. Fire blazr (talk) 20:02, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Hypnerotomachia Poliphili


text:
Communism in Peru

Communism in Peru was represented by far-left-oriented organizations that refer to themselves as communist (comunista) parties, movements, organizations, groups, etc.

Peruvian Communist Party
The oldest communist party in Peru is the Peruvian Communist Party (Partido Comunista Peruano), founded in 1928 by José Carlos Mariátegui, under the name Socialist Party of Peru (Partido Socialista del Perú). In 1930, the name was changed to Peruvian Communist Party. Jorge Del Prado was the party's General Secretary between 1966 and 1991.

The General Secretary is Roberto de la Cruz. The main political base of PCP-Unidad is located at Plaza Ramón Castilla, Lima and is led by Renán Raffo Muñoz. PCP publishes Unidad ("Unity") and Nuestra Bandera ("Our Flag").

Partido Comunista del Perú – Patria Roja
Another party that also considers itself the Communist Party of Peru is the Partido Comunista del Perú – Patria Roja. It was founded in 1970, and as of 2006 was headed by Alberto Moreno. It descends from the mainstream faction of PCP-Bandera Roja, which, in turn, originated as a Maoist faction within the Partido Comunista Peruano.

Partido Comunista Peruano
Both PCP-Bandera Roja and PCP-Unidad are named after their traditional press organs. The name "PCP-Unidad" is an informal designation; the official name of the PCP-Unidad is simply "Partido Comunista Peruano".

PCP-Mayoría
PCP-Mayoría operated around 1980: its members considered that PCP-Unidad had taken a Eurocommunist turn, while they themselves preferred a more hard-line Soviet stance.

Others
A few other groups consider themselves to the Communist Party of Peru. The best known is the one known as the "Shining Path" (a name that the group does not use). This armed group, regarded by the Peruvian state as a terrorist organization, is an offshoot of PCP-Bandera Roja, which split from it in the early 1970s. The "Shining Path" considers PCP-Patria Roja and PCP-Unidad to be revisionist; it assassinated several of their militants and elected officials.

Political parties that have used the name
The Peruvian Communist Party was founded with the name Peruvian Socialist Party (Partido Socialista del Perú) by José Carlos Mariátegui, and is considered the first communist party in Peru.

A number of political parties claim the name and legacy of the original party:
 * Communist Party of Peru (Marxist–Leninist)
 * Communist Party of Peru – Red Fatherland
 * Communist Party – Red Star
 * Communist Party of Peru – Shining Path
 * Peruvian Communist Party – Red Flag
 * Proletarian Party of Peru
 * Revolutionary Communist Party – Red Trench
 * Revolutionary Communist Party (Working Class)
 * Revolutionary Socialist Party (Marxist–Leninist)
 * Revolutionary Vanguard (Communist Proletarian)
 * Revolutionary Workers' Party (Peru)
 * Worker Peasant Student and Popular Front
 * Workers' Revolutionary Party (Peru)

The United Left movement was a loose alliance of several of these leftist parties that gained a strong political presence in the 1980s.

title: Communism in Peru


text:
Talk:Declaration of independence

Lists
Is there a possibility of having a separate article like, Lists of Declarations of Independence? What qualifies DoIs to be included in the list of example DoIs? Probably half the nations on Earth have DoIs, almost all of which are interesting to read. --seav 11:54, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)

What about the CSA
Wasn't the the CSA's declaration of independence unilateral as well? Cameron Nedland —This unsigned comment was added by 66.205.108.8 (talk • contribs) 20:33, September 17, 2005.

title: Talk:Declaration of independence


text:
Inglewood

Inglewood may refer to:

Australia

 * Inglewood, Queensland
 * Shire of Inglewood, Queensland, a former local government area
 * Inglewood, South Australia
 * Inglewood, Victoria
 * Inglewood, Western Australia

Canada

 * Inglewood, Ontario
 * Inglewood, Calgary
 * Inglewood, Edmonton

New Zealand

 * Inglewood, New Zealand

South Africa

 * Inglewood, Eastern Cape

United Kingdom

 * Inglewood, Cheshire, a house
 * Inglewood Forest, Cumberland
 * Inglewood Children's Home In Otley

United States

 * Inglewood, California
 * Inglewood, Nebraska
 * Inglewood, Mecklenburg County, Virginia
 * Inglewood, Rockingham County, Virginia
 * Inglewood (Glasgow, Missouri), a historic house
 * Inglewood (Harrisonburg, Virginia), a historic house
 * Inglewood-Finn Hill, Washington, a census-designated place (CDP) in King County, Washington

Ireland

 * Inglewood (Dublin), a housing estate.

People

 * Baron Inglewood

title: Inglewood


text:
Talk:Robert Moses

He also had an influence in Baltimore
An article today, 3/29/16, in the WAshington Post talked about his influence in Baltimore. A quick google search verifies that he did have some effect but this is not mentioned in this article. somebody should write it up.Conscientia (talk) 16:24, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

The fact that he was one of the most corrupt people of all time isn't even mentioned???
Gore Vidal wrote a long expose of Robert Moses, who enriched himself to the tune of millions by committing fraud on an unprecedented scale, unprecedented even for NYC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.127.51 (talk) 05:55, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Tangentially Related Info
Robert Moses drafted an off-the-shelf freeway plan for Portland, Oregon which was never implemented. He did the same for countless cities in the US. In the 1940s, EVERYONE had a Moses plan.

Who's pimping Portland? What (presumably) PSU student keeps inserting irrelevant quotes regarding PDX into these articles? (Moses and others). Case in point: "...and has since begun to be reversed to an extent in some locales by careful, planned steps by the government, private sector, and people alike. (Nowhere is this more evident than Portland, Oregon)."

I'm sorry. A proper discussion of Moses includes his stomping grounds (NYC and surrounding environs), his effects on the larger region (NE), and the country and world at large (US, North America). Portland has, to be crass, jack shit to do with him.

I am removing these references.

---N - Tacoma, WA

Someone added a claim Moses originated the practice of "redlining". As this was a concept that started in the banking industry and insurance industries it seems unlikely, I'm unfamiliar with the claim, and there's no cite for authorities

Old comments
This is a nice first cut at a Moses bio, and certainly briefer than Caro. But is "evil genius" neutral point of view? Moses certainly didn't consider himself evil. Clearly some of his ideas were of his time, and have been later viewed as mistaken (urban freeways), but the construction of parks, bridges, playgrounds and houses are rarely the works of evil men. Might want to consider NPOVing this up. dml

 * the 1964 World's Fair probably needs a mention too. -- Someone else 03:56, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * I think I've improved the viewpoint a little. But I'm not at all sure I can be fair to Robert Moses. Along with the World's Fair, we should probably add the attempted highway across Chinatown, and the deliberate building of overpasses on the Southern State Parkway too low for buses, to keep the working class out of Jones Beach. Vicki Rosenzweig

 * I suggest removing 'evil genius'. It is apparent enough from the article the type of man he was, especially in the summary at the end. -- Viajero 19:58, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

 * I bit the bullet and removed it, mostly cause the "comment" markup was wrong, but also because being "evil" and being a "genius" is not sufficient to make one an "evil genius": for that you must also plot to take over the world  -- Someone else 04:16, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

>>> Moses issued orders to demolish the old Penn Station in 1964. No he didn't. This was owned by the Pennsylvania railroad and it was losing money, so they decided to build Madison Square garden on the site to make more money!

Did Moses have anything to do with the WTC towers? I feel like there's at least a peripheral connection. Should that be mentioned? jengod 20:57, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

It might help the objectivity of this article of "accomplishments" were not put in sarcastic quotation marks. Yes, it is evident that Moses had ulterior motives as well as obvious racist sentiments, but remember first that these sentiments were far from uncommon in those times, and also despite any negative views he held, his contribution to the city did radically change the face of the region, as well as the socio-economic structure. Objectively talking about the effects and his possible motives for certain actions is fine, but a good scholar does not make his antipathy toward a subject evident in his writing. It might help to seperate this article into biographical information (ideology, background, etc) and professional information(what/how/when and its effects on the city/nation as a whole). --Firelily17:31 EST 01 May 2005

Moses and Twin Towers
Moses had little to do w/ the WTC. Jameson Doig, in his history of the Port Authority, Empire on the Hudson, does not mention Moses in the context of the Twin Towers.

Non-governmental people who were involved w/ the TWin Towers were David Rockefeller and Austin Tobin.
 * The World Trade Center was a project undertaken by the Port Authority under the supervision of then Governor Rockefeller. By the time the project was in planning stages, Moses had lost much of his power and influence.

Long Island
Moses is certainly honored on Long Island; whether this reaches the level of "adoration" is probably a little too POV. I'd suggest "widely honored" or the like, but will leave it for now and not be bold until the last contributor/editor has another swipe at it.

Rlquall 06:15, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * there's a r moses pkwy near niagara falls, too. - Omegatron 04:21, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

Miles of freeway?
"Los Angeles is considered the "freeway city", but the New York Metro Area (New York + Northeastern New Jersey) actually has more miles of highway." Is there a source for this? How is this computed? What's definied as the metro areas? Of course the NYC area has more miles than LA proper, which is what a strict reading would say. I've commented out this line. --SPUI (talk) 13:23, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It came from The Power Broker. I won't be able to remember the pg, but I'm sure Caro gave that statistic.Dinopup 18:58, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Indeed it did come from "The Power Broker": page 940 of my edition, in the chapter "Point of No Return." Here's the quote: "In 1964, when Robert Moses completed his major highway building, there were completed or well under way in the New York metropolitan region 899 miles of such highways -- 627 built by him .... No other metropolitan region in America possessed 700 miles of such highways. No other metropolitan region possessed 600 miles -- or 500. Even Los Angeles ... possessed in 1964 only 459 miles of such highways." I checked the end notes, and although they are extensive, I can find no source for Caro's numbers.02:58, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
 * These figures have changed somewhat in the forty years since Caro published his biography. The Los Angeles metropolitan area has sprawled out into the surrounding counties, stimulating the building of many new freeways, roads, and even some toll-ways.

--I think Caro was emphasizing this in order to bring home a point. In reality, absolute numbers mean very little. What would be relevent is showing highway miles per capita, which I'm sure LA would beat out NY on in a heartbeat. Also, I don't see why NJ should be included when talking about Moses' influence, since he had nothing to do with any of those. --Jleon 22:56, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, he had plenty to do with those highways in NJ -- at least according to Caro. I replaced the relevant sentence with an ellipses in my quote above, and now I've returned the book to the library. However, if I remember correctly, Caro wrote that the Port Authority of NJ and Robert Moses made a deal whereby Authority money would go to Moses' highway and bridge projects in NY and NJ. The Authority was afraid that the NJ state legislature was going to force it to use its sizable savings to improve the railroads and public transit, but the Authority knew it would make more money from toll-paying bridges and highways. However, it lacked the vision and expertise to build those bridges and highways, so it had Moses do it for them.--Adamzs 01:48, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

--Moses certianly made his share of deals with the Port Authority, and one could even argue that his influence was a major source of inspiration behind many of NJ's highway projects. However, Moses simply never had a direct hand in any highway building projects in NJ, or in any other state besides NY, for that matter. I've read Caro too, of course, and I'd love to know what pages you are referring to when you say that highway construction in NJ was ever ceded over to Moses. --Jleon 17:20, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * This discussion is old - but Moses had a hand in designing the route for the Palisades Interstate Parkway, which passes through New Jersey (but was designed to bring New Yorkers to the Palisades Interstate Park). As far as I know, that is the only highway Moses was involved in building in New Jersey. Darkcore 20:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

NPOV
The first paragraph of this article definitely needs to be NPOV'd, big time. While I personally am not a fan of displacing neighborhoods for freeways or excessive "auto-oriented" urban development, the article's introduction is no more than an opinionated criticism with a birthdate. Somebody please change this!

 * Feel free. It's hard to say that his "mistakes" is NPOV, any more than his alleged "adoration" on Long Island is, but it's hard not to see some of his freeway projects as a mistake.  What the article needs to say is that some of his projects are now considered to have been mistakes by many informed observers and then sources for this cited, and also to source just who his Long Island "adorers" are.  If you can do this, you should.  Rlquall 04:46, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I have re-worked the opening paragraph. While it is not perfect, I think it neutralizes the paragraph enough to remove the NPOV template from the article.  Anyone that wants to clean it up more, feel free.  K1vsr 21:12, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Nice job K1vsr with the opening paragraph. It is quite neutral now. The next paragraph needs significant work. In particular: "Never elected to public office ... without having to answer to the general public or to elected officials ... responsible for 90% of the state's debt" I feel like it would be better to describe what he actually did first and then get into the controversial details. Also, the current debt of the state shouldn't be in his introduction paragraph! I think whoever started this section hit the nail on the head with his criticism. Lets fix this! (note I have added the POV tag to the article) Lansey (talk) 16:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * One of the most significant facts about Moses was that he was not a politician. Our experience today is of years of public meetings, debate, and repeated plebiscites before every major infrastructure project. Not to mention environmental impact statements and endless rounds of lawsuits. That one man, unelected, could build so much, with other people's money, with so little standing in his way is what makes him unique, and utterly unfamiliar to the modern citizen. New York state's debt structure is equally unique, and is as much a legacy of Moses as the infrastructure he built, and will probably outlast most of the physical structures. By all means, rephrase it to be as neutral as you can, but the facts themselves deserve mention in the lead. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:24, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Redirect
It is simiply a matter of Wikistyle to eliminate redirects in blue links whenever possible. It is not a matter of endorsing the Dodgers' move to LA or not! Rlquall 00:23, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Unclear paragraph
This paragraph is unclear, not to mention poorly written:

"Because of this, however, those aspiring city planners, landscape architects, designers and all manner of civil engineers know what not to do in terms of designing causeways and parks. There should (at least in a city planning spectrum) not be bias towards corporate or otherwise higher-class citizens, as he showed in the planning of Central Park. There should be shown interest and great care when dealing with already existing neighborhoods in planning and design—especially in reference to the lower class. And lastly, but certainly not leastly, planners need to discern what place is the automobile's and what place is designated the person's. This conflict, above all, did Moses epitomize, with his many beltway projects. He made driving enjoyable, and thus spurred on the use of the automobile (not that its use would have died out without Moses' contributions)."

And what is the deal with "higher class" vs. "lower class"? Is this article a sociological study in urban planning? I will try and have a crack at it...Marlowe

JP Morgan
The following comment was originally posted alone at the top of this page, I have moved it here. -Lanoitarus (talk) .:. 08:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC) J.P. Morgan died in 1913. What's the source for his reference here? -- Mike Schiraldi 01:31, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Its pretty much public record, the parkways in long island follow a large circle path to avoid these estates. The most detailed source would be Caro's book, but its also a matter of public record. -Lanoitarus (talk) .:. 08:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

 * It's also a known fact that the residents of Old Westbury and East Hills forced Moses to avoid that area, and later claimed he was discriminating against them by not building the road through their communities; Something he didn't do when he built the Long Island Expressway. -User:DanTD (talk) 15:22, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Long Island Motor Parkway
A neutral article would also assign the blame on the destruction of the Long Island Motor Parkway to Moses.

Comment
I see any effort to compare Moses's efforts favorably with current developnent disasters (i.e. Ground Zero and the Big Dig) is deemed "NPOV". Is wikipedia a digital Pravda? I'm sure if we just wanted to reprint Caro's book we could simply ask for copyright permission, why engage in indepednent thought or reasoning —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.141.171 (talk • contribs).

 * Wikipedia is not a place to add your own opinions (see WP:OR), if You find such comparisons from newspapers etc. then You are welcome to add them (linking to the source). Thanks, feydey 19:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

In respose to critiques herein I linked to a recent op-ed about the Big Dig making the point it was lacking vision in its construction and planning, and attributing my statement re: the Rye-Oyster Bay Bridge to the webmaster at NYCroads, which I already had cited.

Frankly, NYC's fiasco re: Ground Zero redevelopment reaches the "common knowledge" level.. re: cites...where to start? Isn;t a large hole in the ground rather self-evident?

 * Where the heck did you get the idea that Wikipedia is a place for indepedent thought or reasoning, or for propagation of "common knowledge"? Please consult Wikipedia policy and conform your edits to that. -- 71.102.194.130 08:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

UN?
The opening of the article says that Moses was responsible for the UN being built in NY rather than DC. Could we get a citation or some more details? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.172.169.21 (talk • contribs).

--Robert Caro mentions it in the Powerbroker. p.771-5. Moses didn't get it built but he had a huge influence in coordinating resources to get it done. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.106.111.182 (talk • contribs).

--I added a citation needed tag for the above mentioned assertion (now in paragraph 3). The Caro citation listed above isn't enough, because it doesn't specify what Moses's role was vs. William Zeckendorf and John_D._Rockefeller,_Jr.. It's a complicated question, but I think we should try to get it right.Fixifex (talk) 17:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Long Island "landlocked"
[...] leaving densely populated Long Island landlocked may not have been an optimal policy decision [...]

There must be a better word as Long Island is the opposite of landlocked. Lent 04:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

 * How about isolated? Thesilence 20:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Are we jumping the gun here?
Three major exhibits in 2007 helped rehabilitate his image among intellectuals, as they realized the magnitude of his achievements. These exhibits haven't even opened yet, how have they already rehabilitated his image? Pdxstreetcar 03:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC) (and I'm not the same Portland poster mentioned below)
 * we are telling users what the New York Times reported. The decision of curators and experts at three major museums in NYC, bolstered by interviews, is the "rehabilitation," not how many people eventually look at the exhibits. Rjensen 11:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Brooklyn Battery Bridge
I notice a change from saying the Navy vetoed the bridge, to the War Department (Army). So, which one had the say so, at that time? Today it would be the Army. Jim.henderson 23:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Caro, p. 674, notes that Secretary of War Woodring, acting for Army Corps of Engineers, veoted the bridge because it was "seaward of a vital Navy establishment.". So I suppose it could be both. Sammons58 00:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks. So, the correction is correct, since legally speaking it was indeed an Army job to protect the Navy from undue development endangering navigation.  My guess is, this has been the law for at least the entire 20th century, though of course one could expect interdeparmental cooperation in an interservice matter.  And, in this case, the power was abused for a political purpose.  Or, from a conservative point of view, the military establishment was wisely used to block excessive civic progress.  Whatever spin is preferred.  Jim.henderson 04:30, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

nelected public transit or hostile towards it?
It might seem like a nit, but I would argue that this current phrase doesn't go far enough: "the decline of public transport through disinvestment and neglect." Moses didn't just neglect public transit, he was actively hostile towards it (e.g. he called for low overpasses on the parkways to make sure no one tried running busses on them later). -- Doom 05:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Where was this? I've heard it said of Jones Beach, but when I bicycle to that park I have to dodge buses.  See the article Jones Beach.  Was it some other parkway?  Jim.henderson 07:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

My source on that is a remark in "The Last Intellectuals" by Russel Jacoby. I would be very surprised if Jacoby wasn't using the Caro book as a source. I'll check that when I can. Myself, I don't remember ever seeing a bus on the Northern State Parkway. -- Doom 20:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, yes, a basic part of the theory of a "parkway" is that it's for non commercial traffic, with no big vehicles detracting from a pleasure drive in a family car. NSP, Palisades, Taconic, and other parkways were bigger than 19th century ones, but still operated on that theory. And indeed I think they still operate that way, Moses or no Moses, overpasses or no overpasses. Jones Beach of course is an exception, since all roads there are nominally Parkways and if the theory were fully followed then trucks wouldn't bring in food and lumber for the boardwalk. So, to say Moses was a bad administrator of parks because he stuck with the theory of the parkway as far as practical, well, so does pretty near everyone who does anything with parks. Jim.henderson 17:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The claim that this is "a basic part of the theory" is ad hoc and POV. And no one has said Moses was a bad administrator -- that's quite a strawman.  The argument -- based on evidence -- is that Moses' policies were deliberate and effective means of blocking access to the poor. -- 71.102.194.130 08:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

One of the reasons for the decline of public transit in NYC was the city following WWII was under political pressure to keep the subway fare too low to justify reinvestment into new lines and equipment. Moses had the ability to charge "what the traffic would bear" on his toll bridges, hence had the funds to spend on new roads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Moses actively blocked public transportation, not just by the low bridges (on multiple parkways), but by refusing to included rights-of-way for rail in any of his roadway takings, when simply setting aside the land as part of that process would have made such an option viable, even if he didn't have to provide the funds for construction. He prodded the city of New York into doubling transit fares in the early 1950s, in order to reallocate million of city bonding capacity to building roads instead of subway improvements. It's not an isolated incident, and it's not just setting other priorities. He worked against public transit throughout his career, and the pattern is well documented in Caro. Moses was in the toll business, not the trainfare business.
 * And yet lines like the IND Fulton Street Line and IND Queens Boulevard Line were still extended, and the IND Rockaway Line took over the burned LIRR Rockaway Beach Branch. He never blocked any of those. The Chrystie Street Connection was built with no interference from Moses. Also, he advocated that the portion of the Rockaway Beach Branch north of Ozone Park should be converted into a subway line. Doesn't sound like he was as hell-bent on working against mass transit to me. Just in favor of drivers. -User:DanTD (talk) 05:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Page references
There are evidently a number of different editions of Robert Caro's biography Powerbroker, with differing page numbers. The NYT 1981 Moses obituary gives it as 1246 pages. The current Amazon editions list the hardcover at 1336 pages and the paperback at 1344 pages. So for accuracy, comments on page number should list which edition is being used. --Blainster 17:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The page number inconsistency is problematic, because it is completely inadequate to reference a claim by saying that it appears somewhere in the more than 1000 pages of Caro's massive biography. Page numbers, or chapter and section numbers, or some other scheme are needed to allow references to be verified. How is this situation handled in similar cases, where there are multiple editions of a reference work? Reify-tech (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Cold water
"He claimed that he could keep African Americans from using pools in white neighborhoods by making the water too cold"

Is this a paraphrase? The term "African Americans" would seem to apply to an era after Moses was active in this field. Is there a more direct quote? Jim.henderson 01:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Anyone familiar with the English language knows that "he claimed that", and no quote marks, indicates a paraphrase. -- 71.102.194.130 08:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

From p.513 of The Power Broker (1246 page edition): "Moses built one pool in Harlem ... and he was determined that that was going to be the only pool that Negroes ... were going to use. He didn't want them "mixing" with white people in other pools, in part because he was afraid, probably with cause, that "trouble" - fights and riots - would result; in part because, as one of his aides put it, 'Well you know how RM felt about  colored people.'" From p.514: "To discourage "colored" people from using the Thomas Jefferson Pool, Moses ... employeed only white lifeguards and attendants. ...he took another precaution. Corporation Counsel Windels was astonished at its simplicity.  "We [Moses and I] were driving around Harlem one afternoon ... and I said, 'Don't you have this problem with the Negroes overrunning you?' He said, 'Well, they don't like cold water and we've found that that helps.'" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charcast (talk • contribs) 04:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Where'd Moses grow up?
Currently, the article states, “He grew up in the Dwight Street area of New Haven.” However, I have a source (a Newsday article) that says this: “Moses grew up in New York City, where the family lived on East 46th Street, just off Fifth Avenue” source I’m going to replace the Dwight Street thing with this, because at least this statement is sourced. —BrOnXbOmBr21 10:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, they are both true. The Moses family moved to 83 Dwight Street in New Haven in 1886, Robert was born in 1888, and lived there until 1897, when Bella moved the family from Connecticut to their place on East 46th Street.  So since he spent the first 9 years of his life in New Haven, it's safe to say he grew up there as much as he grew up in NYC.  This is in Caro's book, so I'll be sure to source it as well as leave your Newsday reference.  CraigyMack 04:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ironic that the block where his New Haven house at 83 Dwight Street stood was cleared for the Route 34 Connector which was never built as planned. Is now the low income housing George Street Apartments built in 1973. But the checking maps of the area may be considered as original research. Colonial Computer 17:48, 30 July 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22yearswothanks (talk • contribs)

Interesting Fellow
I enjoyed this article. UnclePaco 04:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, and an interesting article too! Good writing! Better hope Wiki doesn't find it, they think that means: "unencyclopedic," — it's supposed to be dry & dusty. I particularly enjoyed the values which put, "greatest proportion of public benefit corporations," up front.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:E454:D78D:E92F:E1E6 (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Doubtful allegations of racism in regard to Long Island bridges
The article, referencing Robert Caro, claims that “low overpasses on parkways were made purposely too low for buses to clear. . . to prevent the poor and racial minorities (largely dependent on public transit) from accessing the beach, while providing easy car access for wealthier white groups” as if this were fact. Actually, while Moses’ racial views might remain controversial, this allegation, which originates (chiefly) with Langdon Winners whom Robert Caro cites in his book, has been thoroughly debunked by Bernward Joerges in his essay Do Politics Have Artefacts? (1999). On page 8, for instance, he writes that “at the time of the parkway building (beginning 1924), Long Island was already considerably well developed in terms of transport. The Manhattan-Long Island railway operated since 1877, and a rather dense system of ordinary roads was in place, parallel and across the parkways. The Long Island Expressway, a true Autobahn intended to relieve traffic congestion on the Island, was built by Moses alongside the Parkways.” Hence, as a segregational measure, those bridges would be utterly ineffectual. Joerges goes on to give multiple reasons for those bridge’s nature, referring, for example, to engineers who explain “that commercial traffic was excluded from the parkways anyway; and that the generally good transport situation on Long Island forbade the very considerable cost of raising the bridges. In other words, Caro and Winner don’t know what they are talking about.” —Telofy (talk) 15:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

 * That whole section (#Legacy and lasting impact) reads like an essay (using rhetorical questions and basically advancing the editor's opinion) so I stuck . As you are familiar with the subject, please try to clean it up. Adding this counter-argument is important to the article's neutral point of view, as it currently blatantly pushes Winner's thesis for a large part of that section. -M.Nelson (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Done. I cleaned it up as well as I could and fixed a few typographic issues. If you think it’s still essay-like, please put that template back up. —Telofy (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Having read the Joerges article, I feel that "throughly refuted" is much too strong. Changing it to "disputed" will do trick, and will let readers decide for themselves whether his argument is convincing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.215.101.254 (talk) 20:33, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it
I read about three screens and I still don't understand what was this man's job. It seems he wasn't mayor, nor governor. Whatever he was, it should be explained in the first paragraph of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.41.197.108 (talk) 20:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I added a paragraph to the lead which explains what he actually did -- which was to create and run public authorities. But the question "Who was this guy and how did he hold so much power?" is the central conundrum of Moses and the very thing that made him remarkable. The precise answer to the question is complicated and subject to some dispute--Dbratland (talk) 22:29, 21 July 2010 (UTC).
 * I still don't see what was his job. "Mastermind" works for somebody who did his work by occupying a series of positions. E.g., Einstein was a patent examiner; later he became a student, a lecturer, a professor and so on. And even for Einstein, you could still say, in one phrase, "he was a physicist". Maybe you know Moses well, but I (and many others) don't and don't want to know more than needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.41.197.108 (talk) 19:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

 * If you insist you have to be given a simple phrase that tells us what his "job" was, you're missing the point. Moses was part of a generation of leaders who wielded enormous power through unconventional and (allegedly) illegal or corrupt means. He often issued marching orders to politicians who technically were above him the the job hierarchy, yet how had to obey because of Moses's informal network of favors, patronage, threats and blackmail. It's complicated. One key is to follow the link to "Public authority" aka Public-benefit corporation and to New York state public-benefit corporations. They are strange, quasi-governmental entities that are a part of everyday life in New York yet alien to many outside that state. He started with the Triborough Bridge Authority over which he held "tight control". On paper his job title was merely Chairman of the Board of that Authority, but in fact he was much more.If Wikipedia tried to dumb all that complexity down into a simple "job title", it would mislead the reader. It's like saying electric current works just like water flowing through a pipe: sure, it's simple and easy to say, but actually it's false. If the reader of this article is left scratching their head at the mystery of what Moses did, that's good, because that means they are starting to get it. Moses was something of a mystery, and experts disagree about him. As Albert Einstein said, "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." --Dbratland (talk) 21:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

 * The article needs a simple phrase that tells us what his job was, in the introduction. (And yes, electric current does behave just like water flowing through a pipe.  The equations are interchangeable.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.64.200 (talk) 14:02, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess you didn't read all the way down to Limits of the analogy. If you've got a source that states what his job was, cite it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 14:56, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe the appropriate term would be "infrastructure czar" Noamthinks (talk) 03:08, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced Material
Below sections contained or consisted of unsourced material that had been tagged long-term. Please feel free to reincorporate this material into the article with proper referencing. Doniago (talk) 13:10, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Reverted peacockery from lead.
I reverted this edit from the lead because it violates WP:PEACOCK. Praising Moses for his ingenuity, creating "infrastructure quickly and efficiently" and "streamlining" the public comment process is a violation of WP:NPOV. Having no public comment whatsoever is not "streamlining", it is "bypassing" and so the word bypassing is kept. Removing the facts that he was unelected, and that NY has a disproportionate number of public benefit corporations is misleading as well. It's important to state the fact that what Moses did was unusual by the standards of how other US states functioned. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

 * The first paragraph looks OK right now. I would use the next two paragraphs of the lede to describe his career in neutral terms, and perhaps begin the fourth, "Although never elected to public office, Moses had a profound influence .."  Something like that.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:48, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Perfidious Advertisement
This article constitutes not much else perfidious advertisement for the works of Robert Moses. Criticism is a mere afterthought in this article. He wrecked the lives of 100.000s, a mayor won an election with a campaign promising to put a halt to Moses. Many think, it was Moses' work that helped essentially eroding NYC's tax base so that it ended up nigh bankrupt. These are just a few thoughts on the issue. The usual set of ill willed WP gangsters - not much else they are - seem to be happy to tossing themselves off to the detriment of well researched content. I am just revolted. 121.216.197.134 (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Moses and Subways
This Statement:

 * His building of expressways hindered the proposed New York City Subway expansion in the 1930s, because the parkways and expressways that were built served, at least to some extent, the purpose of the planned subway lines.

Should be cited to a responsible source or be removed. Caro and other primary-source researchers (to my knowledge) never asserted anything like this.

Assuming the statement means that subway money was limited because of Moses was spending it all (the usual claim), that is a tenuous argument.

In the late 20s / early 1930s Moses was commissioner of the Long Island State Park Commission and spent much of his time building Jones Beach and the South State Parkway -- this was never in competition with the subway system

And while by 1931 Moses was building the Triboro Bridge (that did compete with subways), the Triboro was funded by federal new deal money and loans. Roughly m of the approximately million spent on the bridge was federal (Caro, The Power Broker, pg 387). This Federal money would not be available for the then private IRT or BRT until 1936.

If the statement means that people were uninterested in building subways because roads were already built -- that statement certainly needs support because every subway system on earth was built because surface land was already covered with roads!

There is some evidence that the proliferation of roads may have led to a reduction in fare-revenues, which could be claimed led to losses, which could be claimed led to less construction. But this evidence is from earlier in the century (circa 1915, when cars first become widely available). And the assertion that the drop in fare-revenue led to less subway construction is a big jump that should be cited.

24.90.73.152 (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

 * I have to agree with this anonymous IP. There were in fact other subway lines built during his time in power between the 1930s and 1960s, in spite of the claims made by Robert Caro. The Culver Ramp wasn't the only one. Just look at the time lines for many of the others. -User:DanTD (talk) 04:39, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Strangely formatted "Sources" section
The following was in its own section in the main article. I've never really seen anything like it in other articles, so I'm moving it here for discussion on what to do.

 * Sources
 * "Moses is racist because of his designs where the highway passed through Harlem."
 * "That Moses was highhanded, racist and contemptuous of the poor draws no argument even from the most ardent revisionists. But his grand vision and iron will, they say, seeded New York with highways, parks, swimming pools and cultural halls, from the Belt Parkway to Lincoln Center, and thus allowed the modern city to flower."

Comments? LHMask me a question 06:15, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Post Power-Broker Information...
Is there really no way we can expand the article between the section of Caro's biography and his death? Does no one have any more details of those seven years? That's quite a few years unaccounted for... Nogoodnms (talk) 21:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)Nogoodnms

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Robert Moses. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141126180045/http://nexus.umn.edu/Courses/Cases/CE5212/F2009/CS3/CS3.pdf to http://nexus.umn.edu/Courses/Cases/CE5212/F2009/CS3/cs3.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.janeholtzkay.com/articles/masterbuilder.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:31, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Pop culture
In the fourth episode of Amazon's 'Marvelous Mrs Maisel' Midge speaks at a protest for a road Robert Moses wants to build across a park. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:281:C501:3BC9:F1E0:80F0:DE2A:7891 (talk) 18:59, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
 * That was the Lower Manhattan Expressway, which would've not only linked Interstate 78 to some of it's auxiliary routes, but connected to the Bushwick and Nassau Expressways. Actually this aspect of the series was the one thing that turned me off to it. ---User:DanTD (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how to cite this but in the actual play series Dimension20's third season The Unsleeping City, Robert Moses is the BBEG of the campaign where he is reimagined as a lich trying to impose his will on the "American Dream" to be his specific dream. Notably his road system actually form an arcane barrier that dampens certain magical forces and prevents high level beings from Faerie and Hell from entering the city except under special circumstances. 144.51.12.18 (talk) 06:48, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

 * You'd need an independent source that's discussed it, per WP:IPCV. DonIago (talk) 14:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Possible revisions
I'm considering working on this page to re-organize the information in a helpful manner and expand on Moses' impact on communities of color. People have mentioned his neglect and hostility towards public transit. Moses generally furthered white interests and had a lasting impact on the built environment of NYC which should be acknowledged here. Check out my user page for more info and sources I'd use, and comment on my talk page if you have any questions/comments. Emilyp99 (talk) 23:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Opinion offered unsupported by reference
In the "Early life and rise to power" section, the statement is made that "Moses was a great political talent who demonstrated great skill when constructing his roads, bridges, playgrounds, parks, and housing projects." It has a reference, but that reference is an essay titled, "The Myth of the Master Builder: "Robert Moses, New York, and the Dynamics of Metropolitan Development Since World War II" I don't have full access to it, but it seems that the central tenant of that essay is the blurb I say says that his legacy as a master builder is "revisionist" and that "magnify [his] influence".

45.49.174.133 (talk) 21:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)Greg S

Title I, aka "slum clearance"
There is no mention of Moses' "slum clearance" or Title I program in this article. In my opinion Moses' his displacement of well over 200,000 New Yorkers should be in the opening paragraph. Personally, I see many similarities to the Trail of Tears, but for lower income New Yorkers. This program, and the destruction of lives at Moses' discretion is the main focus of the third volume of The Power Broker.

Here's a good summary of the Title I program and Moses' involvement with it http://www.tenant.net/Community/history/hist04c.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.167.59.8 (talk) 16:37, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

 * This is an important omission and should indeed be addressed. I'm going to look into this. Not sure if anyone is still super active on this page... Cleopatran Apocalypse (talk) 12:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Robert Moses
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Robert Moses's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "NYSP_attendance": From Heckscher State Park:  From Robert Moses State Park – Thousand Islands:  From Robert Moses State Park:  From Cold Spring Harbor State Park:  From Jones Beach State Park:  From Belmont Lake State Park:  </ul>

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

The Power Broker and the Moses Reputation
This paragraph feels odd.

“Moses's reputation declined following the publication of Robert Caro's Pulitzer Prize-winning biography The Power Broker(1974), which cast doubt on the purported benefits of many of Moses's projects and further cast Moses as racist. In large part because of The Power Broker, Moses is today considered a controversial figure in the history of New York City.”

The Power Broker takes several chapters to show how Moses’ public image came to be in decline. While I’d be keen to keep the summary short, additional context might be added to say the Caro biography documented Moses’ fall from grace so as to put the effect of the book into the proper context

174.160.242.40 (talk) 01:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

 * I added in a "citation needed" just a moment ago - to say that Moses' previously-sterling reputation only collapsed because of the book is a serious delusion: the man was controversial well before Caro ever put ink to paper.
 * The whole article in general reads rather more like a newspaper article than an encyclopedia entry. 195.49.26.35 (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Robert Moses


text:
Miniature wargaming

Miniature wargaming is a form of wargaming in which military units are represented by miniature physical models on a model battlefield. The use of physical models to represent military units is in contrast to other tabletop wargames that use abstract pieces such as counters or blocks, or computer wargames which use virtual models. The primary benefit of using models is aesthetics, though in certain wargames the size and shape of the models can have practical consequences on how the match plays out.

Miniature wargaming is typically a recreational form of wargaming because issues concerning scale can compromise realism too much for most serious military applications. A historical exception to this is naval wargaming before the advent of computers.

Overview
A miniature wargame is played with miniature models of soldiers, artillery, and vehicles on a model of a battlefield. The benefit of using models as opposed to abstract pieces is primarily an aesthetic one. Models offer a visually-pleasing way of identifying the units on the battlefield. In most miniature wargame systems, the model itself may be irrelevant as far as the rules are concerned; what really matters is the dimensions of the base that the model is mounted on. Distances between infantry units are measured from the base of the model. The exception to this trend may be models of vehicles such as tanks, which do not require a base to be stable and have naturally rectangular shapes; in such cases, the distances between units may be measured from the edge of the model itself. Some miniature wargames use the dimensions of the model to determine whether a target behind cover is within line-of-fire of an attacker.

Most miniature wargames are turn-based. Players take turns to move their model warriors across the model battlefield and declare attacks on the opponent. In most miniature wargames, the outcomes of fights between units are resolved through simple arithmetic, usually combined with dice rolls or playing cards.

All historical wargames have a setting that is based on some historical era of warfare. The setting determines what kind of units the players can deploy in their match. For instance, a wargame set in the Napoleonic Wars should use models of Napoleonic-era soldiers, wielding muskets and cannons, and not spears or automatic rifles. A fantasy wargame has a fictional setting and may thus feature fictional or anachronistic armaments, but the setting should be similar enough to some real historical era of warfare so as to preserve a reasonable degree of realism. For instance, Warhammer Age of Sigmar is mostly based on medieval warfare, but includes supernatural elements such as wizards and dragons. The most popular historical settings are World War 2, the Napoleonic Wars, and the American Civil War (in that order). The most popular fantasy setting is Warhammer 40,000.

Miniature wargames are played either at the skirmish level or the tactical level. At the skirmish level, the player controls the warriors individually, whereas in a tactical level game he or she controls groups of warriors—typically the model warriors are mounted in groups on the same base. Miniature wargames are not played at the strategic or operational level because at that scale the models would become imperceptibly tiny.

Miniature wargames are generally played for recreation, as the physical limitations of the medium prevents it from representing modern warfare accurately enough for use in military instruction and research (see the section below on abstract scaling for one reason).

Models
Historically, these models were commonly made of tin or lead, but nowadays they are usually made of polystyrene or resin. Plastic models are cheaper to mass-produce but require a larger investment because they require expensive steel molds. Lead and tin models, by contrast, can be cast in cheap rubber molds. Larger firms such as Games Workshop prefer to produce plastic models, whereas smaller firms with less money prefer metal models.

Wargaming figurines often come with unrealistic body proportions. Their hands may be oversized, or their rifles excessively thick. One reason for this is to make the models more robust: thicker parts are less likely to bend or break. Another reason is that manufacturing methods often stipulate a minimum thickness for casting because molten plastic has difficulty flowing through thin channels in the mold. Finally, odd proportions may actually make the model look better for its size by accentuating certain features that the human eye focuses on.

Assembly and painting
Wargaming models are often sold in parts. In the case of plastic models, they're often sold still affixed to their sprues. The player is expected to cut out the parts and glue them together. This is the norm because, depending on the design of the model, it may not be possible to mold it whole, and selling the parts un-assembled saves on labor costs. After assembling the model, the player should then paint it to make it more presentable and easier to identify on the game table. Understandably, the time and skill involved in assembling and painting models deters many people from miniature wargaming. Some firms have tried to address this by selling pre-assembled and pre-painted models, but these are rare because, with current technologies, it is hard to mass-produce ready-to-play miniatures that are both cheap and match the beauty of hand-painted models. The other options for players are to buy finished models second-hand or hire a professional painter.

Proprietary models vs generic models
Historical miniature wargames are typically designed to use generic models. It is generally not possible to copyright the look of a historical soldier. Anyone, for instance, may freely produce miniature models of Napoleonic infantrymen. A player of a Napoleonic-era wargame could thus obtain his models from any manufacturer who produces Napoleonic models at the requisite scale. Consequently, it is difficult if not impossible for a historical wargame designer to oblige players to buy models from a certain manufacturer. By contrast, fantasy wargames feature fictional warriors, and fictional characters can be copyrighted. By incorporating original characters into their wargame, a wargame designer can oblige the player to purchase their models from a specific manufacturer who is licensed to produce the requisite models. An example of this is Warhammer 40,000 which features many original characters who have a distinctive aesthetic, and Games Workshop and its subsidiaries reserve the exclusive right to manufacture models of these characters. Games Workshop models tend to be expensive because competing manufacturers are not allowed to offer cheaper copies of official Warhammer 40,000 models. While there's nothing to stop players using foreign wargaming models (generics or proprietary models from other wargames), doing so could spoil the aesthetic and cause confusion.

Playing field
A miniature wargame is played on a model of a battlefield. The model battlefield is usually mounted on a table. As far as size goes, every part of the battlefield should be within arm's reach of the players; a width of four feet is recommended.

Most miniature wargames are played on custom-made battlefields made using modular terrain models.

Historical wargamers sometimes re-enact historical battles, but this is relatively rare. Players more often prefer to design their own scenarios. The first advantage is that they can design a scenario that fits the resources they have at hand, whereas reconstructing a historical battle may require them to purchase additional models and rulebooks, and perhaps a larger game table. The second advantage is that a fictional scenario can be designed such that either player has a fair chance of winning.

Miniature wargames are rarely set in urban environments. The first reason is that it is harder to reach models when there are many buildings in the way. Another reason is that the buildings may highlight the abstract scale at which the wargame operates. For instance, in the 28 mm wargame Bolt Action, a rifle's range is 24 inches, which is barely the length of a few houses at 28 mm scale. If placed in an urban environment, a rifleman would not be able to hit a target at the far end of a small street, which shatters the illusion of realism.

Model size
The scale of a model vehicle can be expressed as a scale ratio. A scale ratio of 1:100 means that 1 cm represents 100 cm; at this scale, if a model car is 4.5 cm long, then it represents a real car that is 4.5 m long.

When it comes to figurines of humans, the preferred method of expressing scale is the height of a figurine in millimeters. There is no standardized system of measuring figurine size in the wargaming hobby. Some manufacturers measure the height of a figurine up to the crown of the head, whereas others may measure it up to the eyes (the latter is more sensible if the figurine is wearing a hat). Furthermore, the advertised scale of a model may not reflect its actual scale. In order to make their products stand out against their competitors, some manufacturers make their models a little oversized, e.g. a model from a certain manufacturer that is advertised as suitable for 28mm wargames could actually be 30mm tall in practice. This makes the model look more imposing, and allows for more detail.

Manufacturers of generic wargaming models are generally obliged to build their models to some standard scale so as to ensure compatibility with third-party wargames. Manufacturers who make proprietary models designed exclusively for use in a specific wargame do not have this concern. For instance, Warhammer 40,000 officially does not have a scale. It doesn't need to conform to a standard scale, because Games Workshop is the exclusive manufacturer of official Warhammer 40,000 models, said models are intended exclusively for use in Warhammer 40,000, and Games Workshop doesn't want players using foreign models from other manufacturers.

Abstract scaling
Most miniature wargames do not have an absolute scale, i.e. where the figurines, terrain, movement and firing ranges all conform to single scale ratio. This is largely because of the need to compress the battle into the confined space of a table surface. Instead, miniature wargames prefer to use abstract scaling.

For example, a 28 mm model rifleman realistically ought to be able to hit a target from 20 feet away, but this is larger than most tables. A miniature wargame would not be much fun if the models could shoot each other from opposite ends of the table, and thus not have to maneuver around the battlefield. The 28 mm wargame Bolt Action solves this problem by compressing the range of a rifle to just 24 inches; likewise, a sub-machine gun's range is 12 inches and a pistol's range is 6 inches. These ranges may not be realistic, but at least their proportions do make intuitive sense, giving an illusion of realism.

Abstract scaling may also be applied to figures and terrain features, e.g. model houses and trees may be a little undersized compared the scale so as to make more room on the table for the warriors. Like wise model figures will often be oversize for the scale, for example many games use 25 mm figures appropriate to a 1:60 scale when the game is played at a larger scale such as 1:360.

Time
Most miniature wargames do not have a fixed time scale (i.e. how many seconds a turn represents). Most wargame rulebooks instead prefer to define how far a unit can move in a turn, and this movement range is proportioned to the size of a typical game table. For example, Bolt Action sets a movement range of six inches in a turn for most units.

Rules
There are many miniature wargaming rules, not all of which are currently in print, including some which are available free on the internet; many gamers also write their own, creating so-called "house rules" or "club sets". Most rules are intended for a specific historical period or fictional genre. Rules also vary in the model scale they use: one infantry figure may represent one man, one squad, or much larger numbers of actual troops.

Wargaming in general owes its origins to military simulations, most famously to the Prussian staff training system Kriegsspiel. Consequently, rules designers struggle with the perceived obligation to actually 'simulate' something, and with the seldom compatible necessity to make an enjoyable 'game'. Historical battles were seldom fair or even, and the potential detail that can be brought to bear to represent this in a set of rules always comes at the cost of pace of the game and enjoyment. In Osprey Publishing's book about the Battle of Crécy, from its series on historical campaigns, there is included a detailed section on wargaming the battle, in which Stuart Asquith writes:

"When refighting a particular battle, it is important to adhere as closely as possible to the original historical engagement. The counter-argument is that the wargamer(s) know who is going to win. Fair comment, but knowing the outcome of any battle does not usually prevent one from reading about that action, so why should such knowledge debar a refight?"

He adds that unless at least the initial moves are recreated, "then an interesting medieval battle may well take place, but it will not be a re-creation of Crécy." Still, rules aimed at the non-professional hobby market therefore inevitably contain abstractions. It is generally in the area of the abstraction liberties taken by the designers that the differences between rules can be found. Most follow tried and true conventions to the extent that a chess player would recognize wargaming merely as a different scaled version of his or her own game.

Role-playing games
During the 1960s and 1970s, two new trends in wargaming emerged: First were small-unit rules sets which allowed individual players to portray small units down to even a single figure. These rules expanded the abilities of the smaller units accordingly, to magnify their effect on the overall battle.

Second was an interest in fantasy miniatures wargaming. J.R.R. Tolkien's novel The Hobbit and his epic cycle The Lord of the Rings were gaining strong interest in the United States, and as a result, rules were quickly developed to play medieval and Roman-era wargames, where these eras had previously been largely ignored in favor of Napoleonic and American Civil War gaming.

The two converged in the early 1970s. The first known occurrence, from 1970, is a set of rules by Len Patt published in The New England Wargames Association's bulletin, The Courier. In 1971 a set of miniatures medieval miniatures rules entitled Chainmail, published by a tiny company called Guidon Games, headquartered in Belfast, Maine included a fantasy supplement detailing rules for battle involving fantastic creatures. Later, in 1974, TSR designer E. Gary Gygax wrote a set of rules for individual characters under Chainmail, and entitled it Dungeons & Dragons. Further developments ensued, and the role-playing game hobby quickly became distinct from the wargaming hobby which preceded it.

Naval wargames
Although generally less popular than wargames set on land, naval wargaming nevertheless enjoys a degree of support around the world. Model ships have long been used for wargaming, but it was the introduction of elaborate rules in the early 20th century that made the hobby more popular. Small miniature ships, often in 1:1200 scale and 1:1250 scale, were maneuvered on large playing surfaces to recreate historical battles. Prior to World War II, firms such as Bassett-Lowke in England and the German company Wiking marketed these to the public. After World War II, several manufacturers started business in Germany, which remains the center of production to this day, while other companies started in England and the United States.

Rules can vary greatly between game systems; both in complexity and era. Historical rulesets range from the ancient and medieval ships to the fleets of the Age of Sail and the modern era. Often the hobbyists have to provide their own models of ships. The 1972 game, Don't Give Up The Ship!, called for pencil and paper, six-sided dice, rulers and protractors, and model ships, ideally of 1:1200 scale. The elaborate rules cover morale, sinking, fires, broken masts, and boarding. Dice determined wind speed and direction, and hence the ship's speed and the use of its cannon by measuring angles with the protractor.

In naval wargaming of the modern period, General Quarters, primarily (though not exclusively) using six-sided dice, has established itself as one of the leading sets of World War I and II era rules.

Some land-based miniature wargames have also been adapted to naval wargaming. All at Sea, for example, is an adaptation of The Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game rules for naval conflicts. The game's mechanics centered around boarding parties, with options for ramming actions and siege engines. As such, the ship's scale ratio corresponds to the 25 mm scale miniatures used by The Lord of the Rings. Model ships are built by hobbyists, just as normal miniature terrain, such as "great ships" of Pelargir, cogs of Dol Amroth and Corsair galleys.

Air wargames

Air wargaming, like naval wargaming, is a smaller niche within the larger hobby of miniatures wargaming. Aerial combat has developed over a relatively short time compared with naval or land warfare. As such, air wargaming tends to break down into three broad periods:
 * World War I – from the earliest days of air combat to the 1920s
 * World War II – 1930s to the early 1950s
 * "Modern" – the missile age

In addition there are science fiction and "alternative history" games such as Aeronefs and those in the Crimson Skies universe.

Precursors
Wargaming was invented in Prussia near the end of the 18th century. The earliest wargames were based on chess; the pieces represented real military units (artillery, cavalry, etc.) and squares on the board were color-coded to represent different terrain types. Later wargames used realistic maps over which troop pieces could move in a free-form manner, and instead of chess-like sculpted pieces they used little rectangular blocks because they were played at smaller scales (e.g. 1:8000). The Prussian army formally adopted wargaming as a training tool in 1824. After Prussia defeated France in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, wargaming spread around the world and was played enthusiastically by both officers and civilians.

Birth
In 1881, the Scottish writer Robert Louis Stevenson became the first documented person to use toy soldiers in a wargame, and thus he might be the inventor of miniature wargaming, although he never published his rules. According to an account by his stepson, they were very sophisticated and realistic, on par with German military wargames. Stevenson played his wargame on the floor, on a map drawn with chalk.

The English writer H. G. Wells developed his own codified rules for playing with toy soldiers, which he published in a book titled Little Wars (1913). This is widely remembered as the first rulebook for miniature wargaming. Little Wars had very simple rules to make it fun and accessible to anyone. Little Wars did not use dice or computation to resolve fights. For artillery attacks, players used spring-loaded toy cannons which fired little wooden cylinders to physically knock over enemy models. As for infantry and cavalry, they could only engage in hand-to-hand combat (even if the figurines exhibited firearms). When two infantry units fought in close quarters, the units would suffer non-random losses determined by their relative sizes. Little Wars was designed for a large field of play, such as a lawn or the floor of a large room, because the toy soldiers available to Wells were too large for tabletop play. An infantryman could move up to one foot per turn, and a cavalryman could move up to two feet per turn. To measure these distances, players used a two-foot long piece of string. Wells was also the first wargamer to use models of buildings, trees, and other terrain features to create a three-dimensional battlefield.

Wells' rulebook was for a long time regarded as the standard system by which other miniature wargames were judged. However, the nascent miniature wargaming community would remain very small for a long time to come. A possible reason was the two World Wars, which de-glamorized war and caused shortages of tin and lead that made model soldiers expensive. Another reason may have been the lack of magazines or clubs dedicated to miniature wargames. Miniature wargaming was seen as a niche within the larger hobby of making and collecting model soldiers.

Post-War growth
In 1955, an American named Jack Scruby began making inexpensive miniature models for miniature wargames out of type metal. Scruby's major contribution to the miniature wargaming hobby was to network players across America and the UK. At the time, the miniature wargaming community was minuscule, and players struggled to find each other. In 1956, Scruby organized the first miniature wargaming convention in America, which was attended by just fourteen people. From 1957 to 1962, he self-published the world's first miniature wargaming magazine, titled The War Game Digest, through which wargamers could publish their rules and share game reports. It had less than two hundred subscribers, but it did establish a community that kept growing.

Around the same time in the United Kingdom, Donald Featherstone began writing an influential series of books on wargaming, which represented the first mainstream published contribution to wargaming since Little Wars. Titles included : War Games (1962), Advanced Wargames, Solo Wargaming, Wargame Campaigns, Battles with Model Tanks, Skirmish Wargaming. Such was the popularity of such titles that other authors were able to have published wargaming titles. This output of published wargaming titles from British authors coupled with the emergence at the same time of several manufacturers providing suitable wargame miniatures (e.g. Miniature Figurines, Hinchliffe, Peter Laing, Garrisson, Skytrex, Davco, Heroic & Ros) was responsible for the huge upsurge of popularity of the hobby in the late 1960s and into the 1970s.

In 1956, Tony Bath published what was the first ruleset for a miniature wargame set in the medieval period. In 1971, Gary Gygax developed his own miniature wargame system for medieval warfare called Chainmail. Gygax later produced a supplement for Chainmail that added magic and fantasy creatures, making this the first fantasy miniature wargame. This supplement was inspired by the growing popularity of The Lord of the Rings novels by J. R. R. Tolkien.

Gygax later went on to develop the first tabletop role-playing game: Dungeons & Dragons. Dungeons & Dragons was a story-driven game, but adapted wargaming rules to model the fights players could get in. Battles in Dungeons and Dragons rarely featured more than a dozen combatants, so the combat rules were designed to model the capabilities of the warriors in very great detail. Strictly speaking, Dungeons & Dragons did not require miniature models to play, but many players found that using miniature models made the fights easier to arbitrate and more immersive.

Commercial wargames with proprietary models
In 1983, a British company called Games Workshop released a fantasy miniature wargame called Warhammer, which was the first miniature wargame designed to use proprietary models. Games Workshop at the time made miniature models for use in Dungeons & Dragons. Warhammer was meant to encourage customers to buy more of these models. Whereas miniature models were optional in Dungeons & Dragons, Warhammer mandated their use and the battles tended to be larger. Initially, Warhammer had a threadbare fictional setting and used generic stock characters common to fantasy fiction, but as time went on, Games Workshop expanded the setting with original characters with distinctive visual designs. Games Workshop's official line of models for Warhammer eventually took on such a distinctive look that rival manufacturers could not produce similar-looking models without risking a lawsuit over copyright infringement. Although there was nothing to stop players of Warhammer from using foreign models from third-party manufacturers, doing so could spoil the aesthetic and cause confusion.

In 1987, Games Workshop released a fantasy miniature wargame called Warhammer 40,000, which was a science-fiction spinoff of Warhammer. Like Warhammer, Warhammer 40,000 obliged players to buy proprietary models from Games Workshop. Warhammer 40,000 became even more successful than Warhammer. The success of the Warhammer games promoted the sales of Games Workshop's line of gaming models.

Other game companies sought to emulate Games Workshop's business model. Examples include Mantic Games, Fantasy Flight Games, Privateer Press, and Warlord Games, all of which have released their own miniature wargame systems that were designed to promote sales of their respective lines of proprietary gaming models. This business model has proven lucrative, and thanks to the marketing resources of these companies, fantasy wargames have displaced historical wargames in popularity.

Community and culture
Players of miniature wargames tend to be more extroverted than players of board wargames and computer wargames. Players of miniature wargames are obliged to meet in person and play in the same room around a table, whereas board wargames can be played via correspondence and computer wargames can be played online; therefore miniature wargaming places a premium on sociability. (This has changed somewhat with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Wargamers (miniature and board) have become quite creative in devising ways to play games while maintaining social distancing.)

Consequently, conventions and clubs are important to the wargaming community. Some conventions have become very large affairs, such as Gen-Con, Origins and Historical Miniatures Gaming Society's Historicon, called the "mother of all wargaming conventions". Players also tend to be middle-aged or older. One reason is that the hobby is expensive and older people tend to be wealthier.

Organizations

 * International Wargames Federation (IWF) promotes historical wargaming competitions between players or teams from different countries.
 * Johnny Reb Gaming Society – the leading international gaming society devoted exclusively to wargaming the American Civil War; publishes the quarterly CHARGE! newsletter for members of the society.
 * Wargame Developments (WD) was founded by game designer and author Paddy Griffith in 1980, and is an international group dedicated to developing all types of wargames. It publishes a journal, The Nugget, nine times per year and holds a 3-day long conference, COW (The Conference of Wargamers), every July.
 * Historical Miniatures Gaming Society (HMGS) - HMGS, Inc. is a non-profit, charitable and educational 501(c)3 organization whose purpose is to promote the study of military history through the art of tabletop miniature wargaming. HMGS holds several of the largest wargaming conventions in the United States annually.
 * Mind Sports South Africa started as the South African Wargames Union in 1984. It was the first wargaming body to have wargames recognized as a sport in the same way as which chess is so recognized. As a result, South African teams were awarded Springbok Colours (1991–1994) and Protea Colours (1995 to date).
 * The Solo Wargamers Association (SWA) founded in 1976 supports solo players in all branches of wargaming – historical, science fiction, fantasy, miniatures, board games etc. Publishes a quarterly journal Lone Warrior.
 * The British Historical Games Society (BHGS) promotes historical wargaming in Britain, holding events including tournaments periodically.
 * The War Gaming Society (WGS) was founded in May 1975. The Joaquin Valley War Gaming Association (SJVWGA), founded in 1972 by Jack Scruby, Ray Jackson and other miniature wargamers, is a subdivision of the War Gaming Society.
 * The Society of Ancients, founded in the 1960s, promoting ancient wargaming and historical research through Slingshot, the society journal.
 * Warhammer Player's Society. Dedicated to all versions (Fantasy, Ancients and Science-Fiction) of Warhammer
 * Society of Twentieth Century Wargamers. (SOTCW) covers all periods from 1900 to present [land, sea or air] the society has a magazine, The Journal, which is produced quarterly.
 * Society of Fantasy and Science Fiction Wargamers (SFSFW). For fantastical and future, including retro-future, wargames. Publishers of Ragnarok magazine.
 * Naval Wargames Society. The NWS is an international society devoted to the advancement of naval wargames, publishing a quarterly journal, Battlefleet.

Wargamers and designers

 * H. G. Wells – Known as the "Father of Miniature Wargaming" and author of the miniature wargaming classic Little Wars.
 * Jack Scruby – The "Father of Modern Miniature Wargaming". Popularized modern miniature wargaming and organized perhaps the first miniatures convention in 1956. Jack Scruby was also a manufacturer of military miniatures whose efforts led to a rebirth of the miniature wargaming hobby in the late 1950s.
 * Gary Gygax – Co-creator of Dungeons & Dragons and a number of miniature wargames.
 * Dave Arneson – Co-creator of Dungeons & Dragons
 * MAR Barker -Creator of Tékumel: Empire of the Petal Throne, professor, linguist, and author.
 * Peter Cushing -Actor, and star of films.
 * Duke Seifried – Sculptor of over 10,000 miniatures, one of the earliest American miniature manufacturers: Heritage, Custom Cast, Der Kreigspielers Napoleonic, and Fantastiques Fantasy Figures.
 * Bruce Rea Taylor - Designer of the Firefly, Challenger, Corps Commander and Korps Commander rules.
 * Charles Grant – Author and founder member of the UK wargaming scene in the 1960s. Helped popularize miniature wargaming.
 * Donald Featherstone – A respected military historian, introduced to the hobby in 1955. Since then, he was one of the most prolific authors on the subject, and very influential in the development of the hobby.
 * Fletcher Pratt – Science fiction writer (often in collaboration with L. Sprague de Camp) and originator of a popular set of rules for naval miniature wargaming.
 * Walter ("Wally") Simon – One of the original founders of the Historical Miniature Gaming Society. First President of HMGS and Organizer of the Potomac Wargamers, publisher of the PW Review.
 * David Waxtel – Publisher of over 20 sets of rules, and supplement books.
 * George Gush – Noted for A Guide to Wargaming (1980) as well as the WRG Renaissance Rules
 * John Hill – Known for his classic Squad Leader and other Avalon Hill board games, also the author of the popular Johnny Reb miniatures rules.
 * Frank Chadwick – Author of the Command Decision and Volley & Bayonet rules, Space: 1889 and Traveller, and co-founder of Game Designers' Workshop.
 * Richard Clarke - Founder of TooFatLardies and Reisswitz Press. Author of thirteen award winning rule sets including Chain of Command and Sharp Practice. Publisher of over 30 rule sets and long-serving wargames magazine columnist. Awarded the HMGS Legion of Honor for service to the wargaming hobby.
 * Gene McCoy – Founder of the Wargamers Digest magazine and creator of the Wargamers Digest WW2 Rules game framework.
 * Phil Barker – Founder of the Wargames Research Group, and inventor of the De Bellis Antiquitatis game series.
 * Arty Conliffe – Designer of Armati, Crossfire, Spearhead, Shako and Tactica rules.
 * Bob Jones – Founder of Piquet and designer of the Piquet wargame series.
 * Phil Dunn – Founder of the Naval Wargames Society and author of Sea Battle Games.
 * Tony Bath – Author and veteran wargamer, founding member of the Society of Ancients, best known as umpire of one of the longest running and well known of all wargames campaigns, set in the fictional land of Hyboria.
 * David Manley – Author of many sets of naval rules including Action Stations, Fire When Ready, Iron and Fire, Bulldogs Away, and Form Line of Battle, as well as numerous articles and technical papers on naval wargaming, history, and warship design.
 * Scott Mingus – founder of the international Johnny Reb Gaming Society and one of the world's most prolific authors of American Civil War scenario books.
 * Neville Dickinson – One of the original members of the UK wargaming scene and founder of Miniature Figurines, the first firm in the UK to popularize metal miniatures.
 * Larry Brom - designer of The Sword and The Flame, one of the most popular colonial era wargames.
 * Andy Chambers – Known for his work in rules design and revision for Games Workshop Inc. and Mongoose Publishing. Notable games he helped develop include Warhammer 40,000 and Starship Troopers: The Miniatures Game.
 * Bryan Ansell - Creator of Laserburn, Rules with No Name, co-creator/co-author of Warhammer, author Warhammer 40,000 and a host of other game credits. Associated primarily with Games Workshop and Citadel Miniatures, also Asgard Miniatures
 * Rick Priestley – co-creator/co-author of Warhammer, author Warhammer 40,000 and a host of other game credits. Associated primarily with Games Workshop and Citadel but earlier work included co-authoring the seminal fantasy wargame rulebook Reaper.
 * Paddy Griffith - Military historian and founder of Wargame Developments, he devised and ran the first Megagames as well as many experimental wargames that were designed to give military historians a greater insight into how battles and campaigns were actually fought. Many of his wargames posed ethical and moral dilemmas for the players and challenged orthodox thinking.
 * Alessio Cavatore - Writer of many popular rulesets. Famous for his work with Games Workshop, Mantic and Warlord.
 * Lorenzo Giusti - One of the most popular Fantasy Football sculptors with over 800 figures and models for these kind of games, founder and owner of Greebo Games
 * Andy Callan - has produced many sets of wargame rules over a span of several decades, including Never Mind the Billhooks published by Wargames Illustrated magazine.

title: Miniature wargaming