Talk:Jamie Gold

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An entry from Jamie Gold appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 15 August 2006.

This article is part of WikiProject Poker, an attempt at building a useful poker resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents 1 Jumping the Gun? 2 Ari Gold originally named James Gold 3 Age/DOB 4 who is Douglas Gold? 5 Is he Jewish? 6 Big neighborhood 7 Seperated at birth? 8 Liar, Liar Pants On Fire

[edit] Jumping the Gun?

Yes Jamie is chip leader, has made to the final table and has a good chance of winning the whole thing, But can remember last year when Andrew Black was chip leader and Joe Hachem was one of the short stacks, right now Jamie has an artical longer then the 1984 and 1985 WSOP ME Winners!. Sirex98 18:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

It's probably due to there being more information readily available on the 'Net. Not that this is a reason not to expand the articles on Keller and Smith though. Essexmutant 19:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

What I meant is this article is a bit early, should Richard Lee, Erik Friberg, Paul Wasicka, Doug Kim, Rhett Butler (poker), Michael Binger, or Dan Nassif have Wikipedia Articles on them? Last years final table Aaron Kanter, Scott Lazar, Daniel Bergsdorf and Brad Kondracki don't, the point being should someone have an article just by making the final table regardless of where they finally place? Sirex98 20:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I suggest we pick up the conversation again tomorrow, when we see how well he does. Essexmutant 20:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Moot point now, congrats to Jamie. Sirex98 11:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I made the article because unlike any of the others, he already has won a major poker tournament, which then combined with the WSOP finish and film industry credentials easily merits an article regardless if he comes in eighth. 2005 23:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ari Gold originally named James Gold

Based on a back-story in Entertainment Weekly

In the original Entourage outline, Jeremy Piven's character was named James Gold - not Ari.

Image:Goldew.jpg

I know that other wiki post and articles attribute the character's development and current form to Ari Emanuel, but it appears as though the original character was based on an agent named James Gold.

According to this blog post [1]

the Entourage writers had a legal problem with their original name for the agent, so “when the show got picked up, they changed the character’s name to my name.

All the blog seems to state is that two people with the real name of Ari Gold are mad at the character of the same name becoming popular. All the magazine article claims is that "Ari" was originally to be "James." In no way does this seem relevant to Jamie Gold, from my perspective. --Zimbabweed 14:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and included a link to ESPN's conversation with Jamie about this issue. aww 14:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Age/DOB

Please do not edit information regarding Gold's age and date of birth unless you can provide an established source. As for choosing 1970 as a birth year, how do we not know his birthday is in December? --Zimbabweed 14:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Gold is born in 1969 as you can read here [2] on the botton of the page.

"As he continues to inch up the payout ladder -- the top 12 become millionaires -- he's also guaranteed himself a great early birthday present. Gold turns 37 on Aug. 25." Sirex98 06:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] who is Douglas Gold?

Is Gold's brother someone who needs to be mentioned in the first sentence of the article? I'm assuming no, so I got rid of it. Bigdottawa 04:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is he Jewish?

Just curious, looks like a Jewish name Tromboneguy0186 01:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Not that it matters but yes, CNN the day after his win said something in effect of how a nice Jewish boy from New Jersey win... Sirex98 01:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added the relevant cat too. Essexmutant 07:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm tired of this holier than thou "not that it matters" crap. It's an encyclopedia. We include his birthday, a picture of him, where he grew up, but his religion doesn't matter? Yes, do not judge a person on his religion, but I don't see the harm in including it in a friggin encyclopedia Oreo man 04:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be "holier than thou " I just didn't know if it was encyclopedic, Essexmutant pointed out that it was a relevant category which I trust and had no problem with, the category was added over a month ago. cheers --Sirex98 04:27, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Big neighborhood

The article claims (and yes it is referenced) that Jamie Gold and Chris Ferguson are neighbors. however, their articles have them being residents of Malibu and Pacific Palisades, respectively. While these are two neighboring towns, that doesn't exactly make all residents neighbors, now does it? --216.75.93.110 14:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I live in a town abutting Bedford but I don't consider Martha Stewart to be my neighbor. --SVTCobra 23:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seperated at birth?

Image:Jamie Gold wsop2006.jpg Image:Colbertreport.jpg —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ouzo (talk • contribs) 04:38, 9 October 2006.

[edit] Liar, Liar Pants On Fire

The integrity of Jamie Gold has been question regarding his actual involvement with celebrities he has claimed to "represent", most notably by a defamer.com article that sources a few discussions from people purported to be "in the know" via various online poker forums. In addition, there is the whole pending lawsuit thing with Bruce Leyser.

Jamie Gold's "agent" rebuffed one of Golds self-aggrandizations by providing a statement from one single client, with a photo of Gold having dinner with said client, James Gandolfini. This leaves a whole lot of territory regarding the claims of Jamie Gold yet to be proven.

I have added a simple and neutral comment to the article that states "(although the degree of his actual involvement with other stars he has claimed to "represent" is still unproven)". I have run into a perpetual anon deleter with logic problems (see article history for a brief rundown). I would ask for opinions on this matter to be posted here. I will also request moderation. --FactsAndHonesty 23:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Please add comments like an adult instead of a child. Now to belabor the point AGAIN, your POV is of no interest here. If you want to add a comment from a reliable source WP:RS questioning Gold's claims, then do so. That's it. Do it or don't, but don't add your opinions again. 2005 00:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

FactsAndHonesty, You’re using a self proclaimed gossip rag as reliable sources?

"LA is the world's cultural capital.

This is the gossip rag it deserves." -defamer.com

I would think logically that the stars he represented would have made some noise by now if he really didn't represent them, plus I think NBC News is a more reliable. ▪◦▪=Sirex98= 00:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Spare me the tag team effort. One click on 2005's profile makes that pretty clear. Since the logic of what constitutes POV is apparently beyond certain comprehension levels, I'll see if I can't analogize a bit to just maybe help facilitate some understanding. Say I claim to have won numerous poker tournaments around the world. The BS flag is raised. (which, by the way, if you actually read the defamer.com article, you would see that it wasn't "defamer.com research" that was cited regarding Gold's level of truthfulness) To rebut, I show a single poker tournament that I've won... Does this establish my claim of having won numerous poker tournaments around the world? If so, I would like to hereby proclaim that I have won numerous poker tournaments around the world, and can gladly show a single poker tournament that I've won to prove it. This is akin to what we have with Gold; a typical Hollywood me-promoter and endless self-aggrandizer who exacerbates his actual involvement with certain people much like "Hollywood folk" often do (Lived there for 4 years. BTDT). Now, if I posted something like that in the article, that is obviously POV. Simply stating that Golds claims aren't fully verified IS NOT NPOV to anyone who isn't cursed with some sort of pathetic hero-worship for the guy. It's the truth. If you can prove me wrong and show me where he has gone on to verify his claims in their entirety, i'll gladly delete it. Until then, unverified is unverified and it deems inclusion. (and PS- actually read the NBC article you sourced. It doesn't cite a single bit of information that is germane to Jamie Golds career or the voracity of his claims. That was a typical wiki-example of "citing a source" just for the sake of citing a source, even though the source cited is entirely impertinent to the discussion) If you want to leave it with a citation tag, that's fine. I have faith that the readership can understand a notation regarding an unsourced claim does not, in and of itself, require a peripheral source in order to deem inclusion. But if it makes you feel better... --FactsAndHonesty 04:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

So in other words you can't provide anything to back up the assertion. The current text is properly cited, even if the defamer seems a non-reliable source. Read WP:BIO to learn more about Wikipedia articles on living people. 2005 07:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

This is almost getting to the point of being uncivil please don't accuse me of being part of some sort of tag team effort I didn't revert your edit I merely gave my opinion of what I thought of a source that calls itself a gossip rag, I have over 400 poker related articles on my watch list so I'm always watching for changes, aside from me they are others that also watch for changes, me giving 2005 a barnstar(if that's what you are referring to) has nothing to do with this issue which is something that I gave him because I notice that had done a lot of up keep, reverted a lot of vandalism and spam, I don't think I ever even talked to him other then briefly on the wikipoker project, as far as "anyone who isn't cursed with some sort of pathetic hero-worship for the guy" you will see from my talk archive that I'm not User_talk:Sirex98/Archive_1, my point was that if what Gold claims were not true it seems likely that at least one of the stars he claimed to had rep would had came out and said so, or that a major news agency such as NBC, CBS, CNN, or even so much as an entertainment weekly article that refutes his claims. This is from a USA today Article on Gold's reaction to the rumors.

"His instant stardom hasn't been without controversy. Immediately after winning the main event, he became the target of anonymous postings on blogs where he was accused of exaggerating his Hollywood credentials."

"Everyone I've known in Hollywood slammed them," Gold says. "They vouched for me. I didn't think people would challenge my background."

Which you can read read here ,it seem to me that that with millions of people reading it at least one of the stars would come forward.

And as far as this article

It very well may be 100% true, yet it doesn't have a tag line as to who wrote the article or who the source was in the article that they quoted. if they did I missed it. btw my own personal opinion of Gold after watching the WSOP, was that he was more lucky then skillful, I rather had seen Allen Cunningham win it, but so what▪◦▪=Sirex98= 09:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)