Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poker/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 → Archive 10

Bobby's Room

There are several references to "Bobby's Room" as the biggest cash game of poker. Is it worthy of a page? Is there anyone here who could write it? --Tucson Indigo (talk) 04:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it could be but since it is just a room in another place that has an article I'd just redirect the link rather than make a separate, redundant article. 2005 (talk) 07:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
I agree with 2005... the subject is clearly notable enough to warrant a page... and it is verifiable... thus could probably witstand an AFD... but, unless you can make it more than a stub, I'd probably include it as a section on the Casino's mainpage... but if you want to write an article feel free to do so...Balloonman (talk) 08:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Hall of Fame inductees with no articles

8 of the Hall of Fame inductees have no Wiki article. I will work on some of them later (behind a firewall right now), but if anyone wants to help out, they are as follows:

♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ 18:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

well I finally got around to doing all of this, four months after I said I would. These article stubs have all been started. Further work is needed, though, such as verifying facts or updating the number of WSOP bracelets won. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 07:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Great. 2005 (talk) 10:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm just worried that as there isn't much to these articles that they might be more appropriate as redirects.Balloonman (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
If that's the case, no problem...I say we let Wikipedia work it's magic for a bit and then change to re-directs, etc. later if neccessary. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 19:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Michael Graves (poker player)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Graves (poker player) a WSOP bracelet winner has been nominated for deletion.Balloonman (talk) 23:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Lee Watkinson and Player of the Year

According to http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/leeWatkinson.php Watkinson won the 2004 cardplayer POTY but in Template:Poker Player of the Year Award Winners it is listed as Daniel Negreanu. Which is correct? –– Lid(Talk) 13:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

And according to cardplayer itself it was Negreanu. I have no idea where FTP got Watkinson as the 2004 winner from. –– Lid(Talk) 13:32, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't know either so I wrote them, I'll let you know if I get a response.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 17:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
You know professional poker players, they all think they are the best, thus Lee might have said that he was the POTY ;-)Balloonman (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
received this message:
"Thank you for contacting Full Tilt Poker Support.
We have submitted your email to the department that is responsible for updating this section of our website. They will be happy to look into the accuracy of this sentence.
If it is found that the information is inaccurate the webpage will be updated as quickly as possible."

I'll let you know when they reply back. ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 05:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

JJProdigy...

"Worthy" of an article? For anyone who doesn't know - multi-accounter online, did it for a few years. Banned from PokerStars, and then banned from playing the PCA. Just turned 18, has played a few events in Australia in Aussie Millions pre-lim events. Bigdottawa (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

It's marginal, but would probably survive an AFD. There is enough second hand information out there about him.Balloonman (talk) 23:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Article would be under Josh Field, and could be based around info like this. However while such articles clearly make him notable, the only content should be what he admitted to, not speculation that would violate WP:BLP. (Also he just turned 18, so what he did previously was as an unwelcome/illegal minor, which makes the BLP stuff even more touchy.) 2005 (talk) 00:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:Poker Hall of Fame

I've taken Category:Poker Hall of Fame to DVR. If you wish to participate, please feel to join in.Balloonman (talk) 08:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Game theory FAR

Game theory has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Poker pros training site?

Should a Poker pro's training site be allowed in its external links? Strongsauce (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I just finished leaving a note in David Williams article. I'd say sometimes these links are excellent, and sometimes they are poor. The Williams one is just a product selling website, with the product being training including by him. As long as a player has an official site, I'd say that link should not be included. If a player doesn't have an official site, then the product selling one functions as that. So, if it is the main site of a player, or if it has a bunch of good information, link it. If it isn't the main site and and has little or no information beyond product/service selling, don't. 2005 (talk) 23:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

To move: Russ Boyd to Dutch Boyd

I am placing this hear for thoughts on moving the article from Russ to Dutch. Per WP:COMMONNAME the article should be at the most commonly used name, and "Russ Boyd" is effectively never used in reference to him making the article being located at Russ and Dutch being the redirect appear, to me, to be odd. –– Lid(Talk) 10:43, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Agree: Dutch Boyd should be the main article with Russ redirecting. Lead sentence should also be changed to reflect this as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strongsauce (talk • contribs)
Move away. We already have numerous poker players listed via their common nickname - Tony G, Sarge Ferris for example. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 14:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
got bored and did it ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 15:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
This would normally not be an appropriate move a good idea, or at least not as obvious as it looks on the surface, since Boyd's fame is split between his real name, and his nickname, and preference should be given to his real name. (There are more uses of the nickname online, but uses of his real name are heavily weighted toward notable ones. Boyd even created the nickname to avoid the widespread infamy of his real name! But since it is done, fine, it's not worth fiddling over. 2005 (talk) 01:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
heh, interesting, I didn't know that he had nicknamed himself. That's kinda douchey. ♣♦ SmartGuy ♥♠ (talk) 06:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey!, Dan Harrington nicknamed himself! :-P▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 16:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Do you have a source about him naming himself that to avoid trouble? Probably something of note to put into his Wikipedia article. Strongsauce (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
No, just anecdotal rec.gambling.poker threads, which are not close to reliable sources or BLP compliant. 2005 (talk) 20:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

World Series of Poker Eurpore

the World Series of Poker Europe, list the £10,000 as their Main Event[1], it's not our tournament we don't get to chose what is or isn't a WSOP Main Event, they do, so I added to Template:World Series of Poker Winners noting the difference between the two locations then added to the WSOPE Main Event Champion, Annette Obrestad but was reverted by User:2005 stating, "Not buying that; the WSOPE isn't the WSOP "main event".", many people may want to think the WSOPE isn't really the WSOP, but their bracelets do count to say their Main Event doesn't count makes no sense, Annette Obrestad is the 2007 World Series of Poker Europe Main Event Champion. ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 22:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

searching for wsop main event winners, I see no one make this distinction. The WSOP "main event" is one thing, the $10,000 event in Las Vegas. I don't think we should go against every other site on the Internet. Worldseriesofpoker.com doesn't list Annette as the same as Yang or Hal Fowler, so I don't see why we should. WSOPE Main event winners, sure, make another template, but I don't think we should grant membership to a class that no one else does. (To further make the point, the Circuit events refer to "main event" winners, but it isn't the same main event class.) 2005 (talk) 22:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
But the bracelets are in the same class, something that the circuit events lack in common with the WSOP/WSOPE, if Chan win a WSOPE bracelet, he be a 11 time bracelet winner not a 10+1 WSOPE bracelet winner, anyway, you maybe right, if he wins the Main Event in Europe this year, will it be said that he is a 3 time WSOP Main Even champion? this is something i wasn't able to find an answer to, to clear things up I wrote to the WSOP and asked them I let you know if they respond.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 23:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
I tend to agree with 2005 here. While a WSOPE bracelet is still a bracelet, the WSOPE main event is not the same. In time, it might come to mean more or less, but right now, it isn't the same competition.Balloonman (talk) 00:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
This isn't a matter of opinion but a matter of fact, if Chan were to win the 2008 WSOPE Main Event will the WSOP say that Chan is a three time WSOP main event champion twice in the WSOP 87 and 88 and once in the 08 WSOPE or will they say he is a two time WSOP Main Event Champion who is also the winner of one Main Event in the WSOPE, that's the question, what we think in the end doesn't really matter. ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 00:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
They will say that he is a two time WSOP Main Event Champion and one time WSOPE Main Event Champion. It logically flows that you cannot have two "Main Events" in the same year. Do a quick search for Annette Obrestad and Main Event and EVERY one of them specifies WSOP Europe. Oh wait, there is ONE source that doesn't specify Europe, and that's Wikipedia!Balloonman (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Licensable Image of WPT Bracelet?

Would be nice to have for the WPT article. Strongsauce (talk) 02:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I've looked and haven't found any new WPT images anywhere, here is a story on the WPT bracelet, there is a photo in the article but it is not by flipchip (who makes his photos available under creative commons sharealike license), the one shown in the article is by BodogLife.com and there for cannot be used.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 02:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Question about "Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (poker-related articles)"

I'm going through all the pages that have the Style-sidebar. It appears that Wikipedia:Manual of Style (poker-related articles) is functioning as a style guideline, but I want to check with you guys first before I add it to the "Wikipedia style guidelines" cat. The current thinking on style guidelines is: anyone can create them, and they're as official as they need to be, until and unless we have reason to believe they're not. Does anyone know of a reason why this shouldn't be in the style guidelines category? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 21:34, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Notability query: Paul Wolfe (poker player)

While doing some image related tasks I stumbled across this article and, based off the information provided, I can't see how he fulfills the notability criteria of a biography article, let alone a poker player. The article keeps citing him "along side" notable players but notability is not inheritable in that regard, per WP:Notability and I am thinking about AfDing the article but decided to come here first and see if anyone has any evidence that I am misreading the article? –– Lid(Talk) 08:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Similar issue: Cecilia Reyes Mortensen, article seems to only exist due to notability of Carlos Mortensen thus using "inheritted notability" rather than actual notability. –– Lid(Talk) 08:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
We talked about this a little before, there aren't many stub articles that didn't meet WP:BIO, but there was Wolfe and maybe one or two others. Wolfe probably should be afd'ed. Reyes is closer, she has a couple small articles about her, but also could be afd'ed. 2005 (talk) 08:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Some others: Tommy Wang, Kathy Kolberg, Erik Sagström. –– Lid(Talk) 09:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd agree on the other two, but Sagström also has significant coverage under his alias if Erik123, so combined I think he passes. 2005 (talk) 09:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that Paul Wolfe is a Full Tilt Pro, a sponsored professional on their site, Tommy Wang should be up for deletion,Erik Sagström is one of the top online players in the world there is some copy on him from notable sources [2] [3] ver dict.com/Focus/877/player_focus_erik123.html.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 09:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I've put up for AfD everyone I've listed here excluding Erik Sagstrom but including Paul Wolfe. Simply being a full tilt pro doesn't really mean the player merits an article. Most of Team CardRunners, Lynette Chan and even Beth Shak would probably not survive AfD either on the strength of simply being a full tilt pro. –– Lid(Talk) 10:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Corollary to this but it's been odd to me that Perry Friedman, another Full Tilt Pro, has been a red link for so long considering he holds a bracelet and has made four other WSOP final tables apart from his bracelet win. –– Lid(Talk) 10:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madeleine Rowan (2nd nomination) = How this got kept the first time around I have no idea. –– Lid(Talk) 14:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Fidler - Prod removed, article on Negreanu's protege with no real accomplishments. –– Lid(Talk) 00:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiffany Williamson (2nd nomination) –– Lid(Talk) 00:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noah Jefferson –– Lid(Talk) 00:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Deleted alreadyBalloonman (talk) 01:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Two more an another notability query: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee Luong and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Ho. The query is about Adam Richardson which was de-prodded with claims he is the biggest winner in the Cash Poker television program, is he considered notable for this because by tournaments notes he is not notable at all and it's the only thing really keeping it away from AfD. –– Lid(Talk) 22:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Adam Richardson is a sure afd. Zero coverage, aside from being mentioned on all the stastitics sites. Ho has plenty of coverage to meet BIO and merit an article. Loung is marginal. 2005 (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
One note. In proposing articles for afd, you should not be looking at what a person's accomplishments are. What matters is the BIO criteria for aryicles, which boils down to independant, reliable coverage with the person as the focus. Maria Ho very clearly meets the criteriafor an article, whereas Adam Richardson does not, since he has no such coverage. The accomplishments of either are not the point. the point is no independant sources are enough about Adam to cover him, while several do about Maria... whether they deserve the treatment they get or not. 2005 (talk) 02:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee Luong

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee Luong. Badagnani (talk) 03:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

This was already brought up here... You probably aren't going to get much support for keeping her here.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 04:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Archie Karas

This article was promptly, and justifiably by the content at the time speedy deleted but I know that Archie Karas is notable and should have an article written about him. If you haven't heard of Archie Karas read this or simply google his name and it all comes back with the same results: Archie Karas was the greatest gambler in Las Vegas history. Considering the sheer magnitude of articles written about him and the notability that derives from it I don't see how a decent article on him shouldn't be existing. Can I get some aid in writing an article on him? –– Lid(Talk) 04:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I've had his URL saved to do an article but haven't gotten to it. He obviously merits one. The ten piece Pokernews.com series on him can easily lead to a whole article on him of at least long stub size. 2005 (talk) 06:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion nomination

Bad beat has been nominated for deletion. I don't understand the nomination, but have a look. 2005 (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

John Bonetti dead?

No source yet but according to this[4] 2p2 thread. Nolan Dolla made an announcement at the WSOP that John Bonetti has died. Strongsauce (talk) 20:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Nikolay Evdakov

Does this guy deserve an article? He holds the all-time cash record for a single year at the WSOP. If I get the okay from you guys I would like to create it. Ignotus91987 (talk) 00:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not against it, besides the single year record he also ranks 6th among Russian poker player in all time earning with $469,978. however I doubt there is much more to write about him at this point, it seems like with his skills that he will have more of a record for a article at a later date, I think a redirect from his name Nikolay Evdakov to the article 2008 World Series of Poker may be a better alternative in the mean while.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 02:58, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


Final table at the 2008 WSOP Main Event

  • Here is the remaining players that will return in November and a little what is known about them ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 13:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Seat 1: Dennis Phillips (St. Louis, Missouri) - 26,295,000 - $2k live 1 result earnings / unknown if online
  • Seat 2: Craig Marquis (Arlington, Texas) - 10,210,000 - $35k live earnings / unknown if online
  • Seat 3: Ylon Schwartz (Brooklyn, New York) - 12,525,000 - $258k live earnings with 11 cashes at the WSOP / unknown if online
  • Seat 4: Scott "r_a_y" Montgomery (Perth, Ontario, Canada) - 19,690,000 - $406k in live earnings played in the WPT 2008 L.A. Poker Classic "The one Phil Ivey won" / online pro known as plays mostly on UltimateBet as r_a_y
http://www.pocketfives.com/profiles/r_a_y
  • Seat 5: Darus Suharto (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) - 12,520,000 - 26k earnings live 1 result / unknown if online
  • Seat 6: David 'Chino' Rheem - (Los Angeles, California) - 10,230,000 over 700k in live earnings (correction on earlier mistake) / unknown if online
  • Seat 7: Ivan Demidov (Moscow, Russia) - 24,400,000 - $65k live earnings / unknown if online
  • Seat 8: Kelly Kim (Whittier, California) - 2,620,000 - $315k live earnings many results / unknown if online
  • Seat 9: Peter Eastgate (Odense, Denmark) - 18,375,000 - $63k in live earnings, 1 EPT itm / 1 Irish Open itm 9th place
I am willing to bet that each of these players is going to need an article... while I wouldn't argue for the finalist at prior WSOP Main Events, because of the delay, there will be more published about each of these finalist... they will be enjoying 4 months of fame in the poker world as everybody tries to learn as much about them as possible.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 13:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

PokerNews Wiki Page- Suggestions please

Hello Wiki members and editors.

My name is Rob Huxley and I am the VP of PokerNews Ltd. PokerNews currently does not have a wiki page dedicated to it but I would like to change that if possible as I feel our company is more than just a regular website. We publish several magazines around the world and cover all the major poker events around the globe.

I have typed up a very brief outline of our company and have tried my best to use very NPOV tone here.

Can you please preview this description for me, I have it saved here in my sandbox.

PokerNews Test wiki page

Any feedback on additional changes to the piece would be greatly appreciated, I highly respect the Wiki community and would love to have our company listed here.

Other users have attempted to list us in the past, but they of course did not fully understand the correct guidelines for Wiki and hence they were instantly deleted.

I look forward to hearing from someone soon.

All the best

Rob Huxley VP PokerNews Ltd.

Thanks for bringing this up this way, but at this point the propsed article is just an advertisement without a notability justification for an article. The Forbes link is basically a joke since it is just a few sentences. Going through the first hundred or so Google results for a pokernews.com search, there is no independant coverage to merit an article, except in regards to the Tiffany Michelle controversy. More to the point, there are several poker and gambling sites that are as well known or highly trafficed as Pokernews, but none of them has articles based on their web presence. They just don't merit it by Wikipedia guidelines. This is also true of other card or board game websites. They may be popular or well known but they aren't notable according to wikipedia standards, and Poker news at best is just one of about ten similar sites so nothing stands out about it. Whenever it gets significant coverage in mainstream sources it could merit an article in the future, but mentions on other poker sites that the site and a former employee have a disagreement isn't really close to enough. That doesn't mean it isn't a nice site. It just means there are next to no such articles in the encyclopedia for a reason. 2005 (talk) 06:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

List of Online Poker Sites

List of online poker sites is shamefully incomplete and poorly formatted. Currently However I seem to be the only one editing the page. If someone who is more familiar with wiki formatting can help out I'd appreciate it, and if someone can help expand it that would be good too. Be so empty without me (talk) 08:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

As mentioned on other talk pages a prior discussion redirected this to the online poker article. We have a Category:Poker companies category and a Category:Gambling websites for notable companies so we don't need a third. 2005 (talk) 22:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 842 articles are assigned to this project, of which 135, or 16.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:

{{User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|banner=WikiProject Poker}}

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Alleged UltimateBet Scandal

There seems to be an editwar regarding the Alleged UltimateBet Superuser Scandal on the Russ Hamilton article with someone writing in the edit summery "Deleted slanderous untruths", according to this article by Jennifer Newell published on pokerworks.com, that there has been "no acknowledgement by UltimateBet that Hamilton has been officially implicated", however the information deleted here gives two sources a pocketfive link with only the first name of Dan in the byline the other is a story by the same above author Jennifer Newell this time published by pokerplayernewspaper.com reprinting a August 4th, 2008 story from an issue of Poker Player. the question is based on BLP should we remove all additions, they are source however the source doesn't state an officially implication, should we wait for something more official in nature? as of right now I'm leaving the addition removed.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 21:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Those sources are nowhere close to strong enough to overcome the BLP issue. The pocketfives one in particular is useless. Something like this requires a definitive statement of fact from a secondary source (in other words, USA Today would get sued before the Wikipedia). 2005 (talk) 22:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
agree until a stronger source is available, meanwhile I'm almost sure our removal of contentious material will be met with predictable 'these wikipedians' are part of the cover-up or something like that, it may be best that we write some sort FAQ on why this material as of yet can't be used on the talk page if such bad faith assumptions should arise.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 22:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
That's a good idea, but it also needs to be worded very generally, as BLP issues carry over to talk pages, and it seems to be getting more common now for agenda-pushers to use talk pages rather than articles to pass along their information. 2005 (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Spammed articles on WSOP 9

Last month it appear WP:COI conflict of interest edits were made by one poker website to promote themselves by creating articles on all of the 2008 WSOP final table participants. In line with previous discussions here, the simple act of making a final table does not merit an article. I'm going to prod these and/or fix them and remove the pokerverdict spammed links and add references if some of the players do have significant independant coverage. If others wanted to also look at the nine articles and help de-spam them and add any reliable sources, that would be nice. (I think prod is more approriate for now, but they all could go to afd as a batch too.) Thanks. 2005 (talk) 00:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Traditionally, I would agree that making the final table is not enough to warrant an article, I think this year might be the exception. With the 4 month delay before the final table, I think all of the final 9 are going to have more than sufficeint coverage to warrant an article. EVERY poker website, blog, magazine, tv show, radio show, etc will be covering them. Our local radio station is interviewing each of them. The new format makes the final 9, THIS year, notable.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 01:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree this year should make for an exception, in one way but perhaps not another. There should be plenty of stories about this people, but WP:BIO1E comes into play. Except for David Rheem, at this point all of these people would seem to be exactly the type of one-event person the guideline discourages articles about: "If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography may be unwarranted." That really is exactly what we have here. If the people don't achieve this level: " information on the person should generally be included in the article on the event itself, unless the information is so large that this would make the article unwieldy or sources have written primarily about the person", then they probably should not have articles. In other words, it is very likely that after this event at least half these people should not have articles in line with WP:BIO1E. I got rid of the COI spam and left the articles, but it really is hard to ignore WP:BIO1E at this point, since there are not a ton of articles about these people that are not essentially just about the WSOP final table. 2005 (talk) 03:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Bizarre claim about Poker Players Alliance

Due to an edit war over a single article, Steve Beshear, an editor has inappropriately the pokerplayersalliance to the spam blacklist. MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#pokerplayersalliance.org. No discussion, and utterly absurd, people here should take notice and see this bizarro action is rectified as soon as possible. (Additionally the block was entirely unilateral, as the person complaining did the blocking.) 2005 (talk) 10:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

  • WP:CANVASS, anybody? WP:ABF much? The action was posted for review, and specific reasons have been stated. Guy (Help!) 11:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Since your action was unilateral, there is nothing to canvass. It just needs to be reverted. In the future, you should consider there are other editors in this encyclopedia, including those who know subject areas much better than you. Please respect them and state your reasons in a discussion discussion for wanting an action to occur, before you unilaterally take action. Also, creating another discussion in an unrelated place, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#BLP_issue, doesn't lead to convenience for other editors. 2005 (talk) 11:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Poker Template

I've been thinking about the poker template box. It has a space for the highest ITM finish at the main event. Do we want to add a similar line for the WSOPE Main Event? It would be easier to add now, before we have too many WSOPE's, than in a few years.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 14:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer not, but I'd prefer to remove the WSOP main event highest finish line too. :) It's just too much of a minor detail versus the ease with which vandals can screw with it. I think that any notable finish at the main event of either would virtually always be mentioned in the article itself, whereas all the 118th best finishes are extremely trivial and nothing but clutter in an info. It obviously not a terrible idea, but it seems to me to be taking these articles in the direction of "article by infobox" and since most player articles are shortish, it's better to keep this information in the article, when noteworthy, and just ignore the 555th trivia. 2005 (talk) 21:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Good points... I wouldn't mind seeing the highest ITM main table finish disappear as well...---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 15:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

New Entry for Online Poker Room, PurePlay

I have created a draft entry for PurePlay and would like feedback before posting it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CardPlayer08

Thank You. CardPlayer08 (talk) 00:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The site doesn't appeear to meet WP:N. Coverage seems to be almost all press releases. Calling it "legal" also seems absurd. That's an assertion by the company, not an ajudicated fact. Only the San Antonio ref is close to reliable, so before posting an article I'd advise getting at least two sources better than that. (The other two currently are worthless anon content.) The text also is advert-y. We care about why it is notable/memorable, not the stuff it offers. 2005 (talk) 02:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


Bizarre claim about Poker Players Alliance

Due to an edit war over a single article, Steve Beshear, an editor has inappropriately the pokerplayersalliance to the spam blacklist. MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#pokerplayersalliance.org. No discussion, and utterly absurd, people here should take notice and see this bizarro action is rectified as soon as possible. (Additionally the block was entirely unilateral, as the person complaining did the blocking.) 2005 (talk) 10:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

  • WP:CANVASS, anybody? WP:ABF much? The action was posted for review, and specific reasons have been stated. Guy (Help!) 11:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Since your action was unilateral, there is nothing to canvass. It just needs to be reverted. In the future, you should consider there are other editors in this encyclopedia, including those who know subject areas much better than you. Please respect them and state your reasons in a discussion discussion for wanting an action to occur, before you unilaterally take action. Also, creating another discussion in an unrelated place, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#BLP_issue, doesn't lead to convenience for other editors. 2005 (talk) 11:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Poker Template

I've been thinking about the poker template box. It has a space for the highest ITM finish at the main event. Do we want to add a similar line for the WSOPE Main Event? It would be easier to add now, before we have too many WSOPE's, than in a few years.---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 14:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer not, but I'd prefer to remove the WSOP main event highest finish line too. :) It's just too much of a minor detail versus the ease with which vandals can screw with it. I think that any notable finish at the main event of either would virtually always be mentioned in the article itself, whereas all the 118th best finishes are extremely trivial and nothing but clutter in an info. It obviously not a terrible idea, but it seems to me to be taking these articles in the direction of "article by infobox" and since most player articles are shortish, it's better to keep this information in the article, when noteworthy, and just ignore the 555th trivia. 2005 (talk) 21:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Good points... I wouldn't mind seeing the highest ITM main table finish disappear as well...---Balloonman PoppaBalloon 15:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


New Entry for Online Poker Room, PurePlay

I have created a draft entry for PurePlay and would like feedback before posting it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CardPlayer08

Thank You. CardPlayer08 (talk) 00:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The site doesn't appeear to meet WP:N. Coverage seems to be almost all press releases. Calling it "legal" also seems absurd. That's an assertion by the company, not an ajudicated fact. Only the San Antonio ref is close to reliable, so before posting an article I'd advise getting at least two sources better than that. (The other two currently are worthless anon content.) The text also is advert-y. We care about why it is notable/memorable, not the stuff it offers. 2005 (talk) 02:45, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Poker/Archive_5&oldid=1079899901"