Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poker Is Rigged

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Poker Is Rigged

Poker Is Rigged (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Totally OR, no RS. ukexpat (talk) 00:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Pure original research. MalwareSmarts (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. I agree, pure OR. Renee (talk) 01:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Spell4yr (talk) 01:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Author Comment, I would like those who suggest deleting this article to perhaps research the references I have provided. Almost none of this article is OR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pates11380 (talk • contribs)
  • Comment - none of those references appear to be RS per WP:RS – ukexpat (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete no evidence of verifiability via reliable sources TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 02:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as unreferenced synth Bfigura (talk) 02:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete essay, OR, POV, etc. JJL (talk) 03:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment much improved but still doesn't add much to the Online poker article; merge if some of it is seen as valuable. Still some OR/SYNTH (e.g., the suspicion part). JJL (talk) 14:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete not an article. JuJube (talk) 03:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Original research and inappropriate synthesis. Maxamegalon2000 05:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete a Wikipedia article, threads on forums, some random website that has nothing to do with the subject, and some guys blog do not constitute reliable sources. Celarnor Talk to me 06:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Author Comment, I have adjusted the references slightly in accordance with what Celarnor has said. The article is taken from sources found on http://www.pokerstars.com and http://www.absolutepoker.com to name a few. These two sources are extremely reliable, multi million dollar coorporations in the poker industry. Please leave more feedback so I can try to imrpove the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pates11380 (talk • contribs) 08:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Your links just go to the main page of some online poker sites; these aren't pages about the subject. Celarnor Talk to me 08:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
Also, a wikipedia article is not considered a reliable source. Please review that. Celarnor Talk to me 08:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Author Comment, All references have been updated. Those sites have unique and original, reliable content.

feedback I've left some comments on your talk page about helping the page. BananaFiend (talk) 09:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
rename - I think "rigged poker" or "online poker rigging" is a reasonable topic for an encyclopaedia. I've left some advice on the author's talk page, and if they seem interested in editing I might help to try save this article. BananaFiend (talk) 10:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Author Comment I've made as many changes as I can to ensure that all content is sourced and referred to. I want to make one last change to the article title from "poker is rigged" to "online poker rigging" but I am not sure how to do so. All feedback is very much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pates11380 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Delete - The article Online poker already covers this subject in the section on Integrity and fairness. If there is cited information in this article that is missing from Online poker please put it there. As an independant article it is not sufficiently cited and reads far to much like OR due to this. LeilaniLad (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Pure original research, not one bit of it is what an encyclopedia should have. Razorflame (talk) 14:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Author Comment Last two comments pleaase read the above statements I have written. I have changed this wiki article so that NONE of it is original research. It is all entirely drawn from reliable sources elsewhere. Please don't be so quick as to spam "OR" on my article when I have taken a lot of time researching and drawing information from other sites.

As for the "online poker" covering this subject. I had already read this wiki article prior to creating this one and I found that the two are entirely different and this one is far more indepth and explainatory.

Author Comment This is not an essay. This is research done from several different information references compiled together to form an article that is entirely unoriginal research.

Please can all further comments be constructive and explain what parts are OR and what it is that makes this article an essay. All criticisms are taken into account and adjustments are made so that this article will not be deleted.--Pates11380 (talk) 15:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Read ESSAY. It is an essay and OR because it takes information from multiple sources that aren't about the subject and uses it to synthesize information. Your citations aren't about poker being rigged; they're about human psychology and game theory. That's good for someone writing an essay or a paper on the subject, but it is bad for an encyclopedia article. That's not how we work. For this article to work, it should be retitled to maintain a more neutral point of view of the subject and include references that are ABOUT THE SUBJECT. Celarnor Talk to me 16:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.