Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poker
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|---|
Contents |
[edit] Portal:Poker
This Portal:Poker was established today without any prior discussion here. Rather than put it up for deletion, I thought a discussion should take place about such a page and how it can fit in with the WikiProject Poker. It seems to me to be constrcuted currently in a way to be very contentious in the future, but I suppose a page that directs people to poker content would be useful if it wasn't as apparently random. What do folks think about what, if anything, should be on that page? 2005 23:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think a section devoted to poker players would be particularly appropriate there. A section for World Series of Poker articles would seem to also be a high priority too. Rray 23:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- Hi guys, sorry for stepping on you toes here. I'm running a similar portal on the Norwegian WP and noticed that there wasn't any here. Somehow I missed this wikiproject. I would appreciate any contribution. The portal is still very much under construction, and I would not resist any changes that would make this portal better suited for this project. I would also very much like to contribute to this project and if nobody wouldn't mind I'll add my name to the list. Babaroga 07:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Please feel free to do so. Welcome. Essexmutant 07:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I will stop working on the portal until it's been discussed and decided how the portal should look and what it should contain. Babaroga 10:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Gaaahhh, my eyes! I like the luminous snot look, but it'd probably look better in poker related colours (red, black, blue and white being the obvious). A nice image header I think would also add the the effect (though I realise we probably wouldn't want to deviate too much from the Wikipedia norm). On a less superficial note, maybe a bar just below the header listing all the most common forms of the game (and linking to their related articles)?--Hpesoj00 12:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nominated for deletion
Since this has remained uncompleted, I've nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Poker. I'd be just as happy if someone wanted to take on completing and maintaining the portal instead of deleting it, but as it stands now I can't see having this stay around. —Doug Bell talk 21:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Relevance at Texas hold 'em
Hello all - User:2005 and I seem to disagree about the relevance of a particular paragraph to the article on Texas hold 'em. Can others please read the discussion at Talk:Texas hold 'em#Online_stuff and comment? Thank you. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 17:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Amateur Poker Leagues
Looking at the history of this project, I see that many amateur poker leages (which are frequently at the frontier of "legal" live play poker and laws about playing poker) are summarily deleted for lack of notability, not giving much respect to the category. Austrailian Poker League (AU), National Amateur Poker League (UK), and World Tavern Poker Tour (US).
I believe that amateur leagues warrant their own category (the Poker page lists most notable leagues under "professional events"). These events are held where poker, in general, is still an "underground activity" and are the only legal way to play without travelling to a casino (or online).
I have researched and added Amateur Poker League, and would like to add National Pub Poker League. The former claims Doyle Brunson as a spokesperson and sends people to major events from freeroll live play, and the latter has a tie-in deal with Mansion Poker, where players attain a seat at the Poker Dome. I edited the Poker Dome article to reflect that the seats do not all come from MansionPoker.net.
I play in the World Tavern Poker Tour (and casinos as many others do - many amateur league players are playing not only for standing, but practice that online or small home games cannot offer) and stay up to date on the legalities of poker in Pennsylvania.
I've looked at the list of players covered, and frankly 90% of them are not General Encyclopedia worthy. If the point of this project is to have and "Encyclopedia of Poker" on the other hand, then they make sense. That said, I believe the different amateur leagues and their structures make for interesting reading.
I would like to see a definition and split between listings of "Professional" and "Amateur" poker leagues.
I propose that Professional events and leagues are those that a predominance of those who "make the money" in major events are professional players (WSOP, WPT, etc.).
I also propose that Amateur events and leagues (LIVE) are those that a predominance of those who "make the money" in major events are amateur or semi-pro players (APL (US), APL (AU), WTPT, NPPL, NAPL, and perhaps the regional televised tournaments such as the Heartland Poker Tour)
A professional being someone who, successfully or not, plays poker as their main job. This covers more than top players. Unsuccessful (or simply unskilled in a relative way) players persist in every sport. Those that qualify for a PBA/PGA/NLB event or team infrequently but plays in lower tournament circuits/leagues as a living comes to mind.
A "semi-pro" being one who does not play poker as their main job, but regularly plays and places in "professional" or substantial buy-in events. These players have the skill to be a professional, but has not "taken the leap" to do so.
An amateur being someone who plays poker regularly and well at a buy-in level below that of a "professional" event, and does not generally stake themself into large buy-in events or games. Or, someone who begins playing with the intent to improve in order to be good enough. Amateurs play seriously with the intent to win and not simply "for fun". They typically hope to become good enough to become a professional.
A poker hobbyist being someone who does not play to advance or win, but to play the game at hand "for fun".
I, admittedly, am in the amateur category.
The "Amateur poker leagues" draw most people from the latter three categories, by my observation, with a plurality in the Amateur range.
The "professional poker leagues" draw most people from the first three categories, with a plurality in the Semi-Pro range.
Herb Riede 16:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- There are no "professional poker leagues". The Amateur things are mostly just business ideas that have not reached a level of notability to to be included in the encyclopedia. Somebody playing poker in a bar is certainly not notable, WP:N. We don't need separarte categories for amateur and professional (for which it is the idea of the distinction for 95% of players is impossible). We only need articles about things to be notable, reliable and otherwise meet the criteria for articles. 2005 00:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
On the contrary, there ARE professional poker leagues, most notably the PPT.
The main point I make is that leagues (tours, circuits, etc.) in which the top players are most often those who do so for a living (i.e. the televised, $5000-10000+ buy in events) are far removed from leagues (tours, etc) where the top players are most often NOT professional.
And I take this only into account in live games, as online poker is more of a game of chance anyways.
There are numerous relatively non-notable poker companies and players in the project (I'd estimate around 20% from reading about 30 articles), such as Chuck Gorson, whose claim to fame is being a notable blackjack player, otherwise only being a legend in Vegas, which is not the center of the poker world.
I say non-notable because they are irrelevant to the poker "world" and not worthy of encyclopedic attribution.
However, if you consider poker a "sport" and not simply a "game" to make money at, then the distinction between amateur and pro must be made.
I don't claim to own the definition of a pro, but IMHO, if someone can make a consistent living doing it (or tries to), then they're a pro - If they only win a single game (no matter the take) and stop playing, then they're not.
Back to the subject at hand...
I believe that this project as a whole lacks a NPOV to the situation, and that notability (yes I read WP's article) has been established in the SUB-category.
I mainly want to contribute notable "lower level" publically formed leagues, which operate in localities where poker is often otherwise illegal.
However, my intent is to not want to have them under the category of "Poker_Tournaments" because they are of a different class from WSOP, WPT, PPT, et al. I want to keep them from "cluttering", or being percieved as equal to, the other massive live-play leagues.
If it would be better, I'd just remove the poker project tag and category, and leave it at that.
Other contribs from other people, such as the Austrailian Poker League, and the National Amateur Poker League (UK) are orphaned as well.
Perhaps if there is someone here with a NPOV on the subject, it would help. Herb Riede 22:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Negative Freeroll
I created an entry on negative freeroll. Please review it and ensure it meets Wiki standards and accurately describes what negative freeroll is, as this is my first wiki entry I've created... I'd also like to put an example from play to help demonstrate negative freeroll. Macboots 07:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Actually I found it informative. —Doug Bell talk 17:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Harrington on Hold'em Vol. III has a more thorough example from actual play (Jennifer Harmon vs. Corey Zeidman)... could someone help me with an appropriate way in Wiki standards to refer people to that book for more info? It's the only place I've found that actually has a decent discussion of the concept... Adding a citation at the bottom doesn't quite seem appropriate. Macboots 05:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] List of poker terms
Unfortunately someone has again nominated the poker terms page for deletion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_poker_terms. Deleting it would create a bunch of pointless work recreating it as individual articles. Please offer your comments. 2005 10:16, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Current deletion discussion (until Feb. 26)
Poker probability (Omaha)/Derivations for making low hands was nominated for deletion on 19 February 2007. I recently created the article. I previously put a comment on the talk page explaining my reasons behind the page. I'm not here to ask people to weigh in on one side or the other, but I'd appreciate getting some feedback from this project regarding the page. Please read the note on the talk page and consider offering your opinion on the deletion. I intend to develop a complete set of articles on poker probability—not only expanding Poker probability (Omaha) and Poker probability (Texas hold 'em), but also creating articles on Poker probability (Seven-card stud) and Poker probability (Five-card draw) (and others if requested). How I proceed from here will depend in part on how this debate goes, so I would appreciate any feedback or participation in this debate. Thanks, —Doug Bell talk 05:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Razz
I think Razz is a big enough game to merit it's own page, instead of just some paragraphs in other catagories. Would anyone have a problem with me creating a separate Razz page? Wtbe7560 18:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Eights or better
Does anyone know how to play eights or better. I've heard of it in casinos but I can't find any info about how it is played. If anyone knows, could you please tell me or create a page for it. Thanks Mikehanson 22:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- Eights or better Stud or Omaha? Omaha would be: Omaha poker#Omaha Hi-Lo and Stud would be: Stud poker#Eight-or-better high-low stud. Wtbe7560 01:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- It's "Eight or better", meaning that an 8-high or lower hand is required to qualify for the low half of the high-low split pot. Two modern casino games use this: Omaha high/low, and Stud high/low. Omaha is also sometimes played with a 9-high low qualifier, but I've never seen Stud played that way. --LDC 16:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
