| Revision as of 00:19, 18 February 2013 editAmalthea (talk | contribs)31,926 edits →Multiple links to profile pages: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:47, 18 February 2013 edit undoDegenFarang (talk | contribs)2,116 edits →Multiple links to profile pagesNext edit → | ||
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
| * at ''WSOP.com'' | * at ''WSOP.com'' | ||
| from ] seem to show similar information; per our ] policy we should probably trim them down.<br>Can anybody say which one of those is the most reliable ore most comprehensive?<br>Thanks, ] 00:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC) | from ] seem to show similar information; per our ] policy we should probably trim them down.<br>Can anybody say which one of those is the most reliable ore most comprehensive?<br>Thanks, ] 00:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :This was discussed at length 1-2 years ago however I can't find the discussion. At that time it was decided that poker BLP's could only have as their external links official pages. Otherwise there is an essentially unlimited amount of spam and semi-spam which could be added for every notable poker player. I think this should remain the policy and only links to official websites, twitter profiles etc should be allowed and everything else should be used as a reference or not at all. ] (]) 00:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:47, 18 February 2013
 | Gambling: Poker NA‑class | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Shortcut
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Request for comment on Biographies of living people
Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.
The two opposing positions which have the most support is:
- supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
- opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect
Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.
Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue the projects below.
Opinions about the notability of Allen Kessler
A few days ago a request at WT:AFCP to create an article about Allen Kessler at Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Allen_Kessler was made. Kessler has three runner-ups at the WSOP with over 2.5 million in earnings with media coverage to his name at pokerworks, his WTP profile a PokerNews profile with video interviews & a CardPlayer article the problem is two fold, it been reviewed twice and declined both times and there is a ridiculous forum thread about the AFCP that is being discussed which includes by the subject of the article.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 22:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- He has the reliable source coverage to be notable, so as long as an article includes those sources, it would be fine. There is no criteria that a poker player needs to win anything to be notable. 2005 (talk) 20:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed. He passes WP:GNG--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:58, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Heads-up Final tables
Does a top 8 finish in a large heads up tournament count as a final table?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:37, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- Good question... The literal "final" table is two people, so I'd have to say no, but I could see why yes would make sense. Does the WSOP count such a finish as a final table? Do they count final tables at all? 2005 (talk) 20:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- For the 20 or so players that I try to keep up to date, I added a WSOP results table like the one at Vanessa_Rousso#World_Series_of_Poker, which is easier to keep updated than prose describing each year's results. She is one of two that have no final tables, but she does have a 5th place in a 256 person headsup event. I have no idea if there is a such thing as a final table statistic and how headsup tournaments are counted. Note that 2010_World_Series_of_Poker_results#Event_35 shows this 5th place finish as a final table.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- No, for the same reason an 8th place finish in a 6-max isn't a final table either. using SF & QF is good enough in the text of the article people will know what it means if put in context.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 02:21, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm quite sure the WSOP does, in fact, have a final table statistic and that they don't count anything third or lower in a heads-up tournament as a final table. The HendonMob certainly does keep such a statistic and doesn't count such a finish as one, either. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 02:46, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Highest ITM Main Event finish v. Highest Main Event finish
I'd like to propose that the infobox be altered to remove the "Highest ITM Main Event finish" line and be replaced with the "Highest Main Event finish," or at the very least include both lines. My reasoning is based on the fact that, if the infobox is to provide a summary of information/facts, then there can be confusion as to how well players have actually performed in the Main Event. For example, Gabe Kaplan's box has his highest in the money finish as 13th in 1991, which may lead some to believe that is the best he has finished. However, in 1980 Kaplan made the actual final table of the Main Event, finishing 6th, he just did not receive a payout. The way the template is designed now can be misleading in that regard and biased against certain players from the early years of the World Series, such as five-time bracelet winner Gary Berland, who is listed with highest ITM finish of 3rd in 1986, despite being runner-up in 1977; three-time bracelet winner Chip Reese, listed as 23rd in 1989 yet with a 6th place finish in 1979; and Jimmy Casella, who is list with no ITM finishes despite a final table appearance in 1972. It also removes a second place finish from Crandall Addington from being listed (finished 2nd in 1974 and 1978, yet only '78 is listed because in '74 the format was still winner take all). Thoughts? HidyHoTim (talk) 19:15, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- What you want is impossible. No considtent records were kept for years regarding people who finished out of the money, and records are still not available. Who finished 3027the this year? Does that person have a Wiki article? Who finished 98th in 2000? Does that person have a Wiki article? In the money finishes are the only thing we can track fairly accurately. 2005 (talk) 19:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with 2005, 1980 WSOP Main Event happens to be the last time that a final tablist didn't cash due the smaller fields, in fact at the 1971 WSOP the players made the FT just by buying in, there were only 6 players, the Kaplan example should be something that should mention in the body of the article in context to the field size at the time, to put out of money results in the infobox alone is misleading in and of itself.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 20:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- Agreeing with 2005 and Sirex98, I'm afraid. Personally, I find the current measure of highest ITM finish to be hideously biased in favour of early players, but that's largely just a nuance of my own head. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- I think highest ITM finish should also indicate field size. 5/6000, YYYY is very different than 5/50, YYYY.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:21, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
- Agreeing with 2005 and Sirex98, I'm afraid. Personally, I find the current measure of highest ITM finish to be hideously biased in favour of early players, but that's largely just a nuance of my own head. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with 2005, 1980 WSOP Main Event happens to be the last time that a final tablist didn't cash due the smaller fields, in fact at the 1971 WSOP the players made the FT just by buying in, there were only 6 players, the Kaplan example should be something that should mention in the body of the article in context to the field size at the time, to put out of money results in the infobox alone is misleading in and of itself.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡ 20:41, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Blind (poker)
This has sat unsourced since pretty much since inception. Is there enough here for an actual article or should it be simply redirected to Betting_(poker)#Blinds.--Hu12 (talk) 19:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Multi Prize Pool tournaments
See this news article: , along with related ones if you like.
TL;DR Multi Prize pool tournaments are a new tournament format where players have some freedom of choice over how much they buy-in with, creating multiple prize pools. Benefits of this are that amateur players can afford to buy-in for different amounts and play with high-caliber, possibly professional players and thus increase a prize pool.
I believe that this is a potentially fascinating concept and could be deserving of either an article or a section in a different article. If so, I would like to take such an attempt to write it, as I would like to see if I can.
As a side-note, and forgive me for using Misplaced Pages as a forum, but wouldn't it be an amazing thing to see a HUGE multi prize pool tournament? Say, a $1,000/5,000/25,000/100,000/250,000 tournament? That would attract an insane number of players, all issues of collusion aside. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 02:48, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
- While it is interesting, I'd hold off on an article until at least two notable tournaments actually use the structure in play. At this stage it rates as "things someone made up one day". We wouldn't want people to start making articles for games or structures that just pop into their heads. So again, I think we just wait for notability to be create when a significant bricvk and mortar or onle cardroom actually puts the structure into action. 2005 (talk) 19:26, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Multiple links to profile pages
I've just restored a number of links to external profile pages since I believe they were incorrectly removed as spam. However, they may in fact be redundant, so some trimming may be appropriate. I know nothing about professional poker, but for example these four links
- Rousso profile at Bluff Magazine
- Rousso profile at TheHendonMob.com
- Rousso profile at Card Player
- Rousso profile at WSOP.com
from Vanessa Rousso seem to show similar information; per our WP:EL policy we should probably trim them down.
Can anybody say which one of those is the most reliable ore most comprehensive?
Thanks, Amalthea 00:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
- This was discussed at length 1-2 years ago however I can't find the discussion. At that time it was decided that poker BLP's could only have as their external links official pages. Otherwise there is an essentially unlimited amount of spam and semi-spam which could be added for every notable poker player. I think this should remain the policy and only links to official websites, twitter profiles etc should be allowed and everything else should be used as a reference or not at all. DegenFarang (talk) 00:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)