CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Balderdash

Board game

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionDec 9, 2025
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Balderdash is a board game variant of a classic parlour game known as Fictionary or the Dictionary Game. It was created by Laura Robinson and Paul Toyne of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The game was first released in 1984 by the Canada Games Company. A US edition appeared that year from TSR, Inc., copyrighted to Gameworks Creations, Inc. and licensed from Canada Games. Subsequent editions have appeared from a variety of companies including The Games Gang, Hasbro and Mattel. The game has sold over 15 million copies worldwide to date. It is aimed at fans of word games, such as Scrabble.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Balderdash” as board game. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Balderdash, Board and game.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1984—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Balderdash, Board and game providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Balderdash”, the useful work is to connect “board game” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 9, 2025. The first chronological checks are 1984.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Balderdash”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Balderdash primary sources, Balderdash archive and Balderdash research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Balderdash”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Balderdash” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.