Shufflemaster
Shuffle Master products edit
Before you make any edits, you probably want to read WP:COI. Any edits must be sourced by reliable sources and be verifiable. Bottom line is that it is best to not edit articles about your company or its products. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- I just removed the advertisement you placed on your user page. Please don't use Wikipedia for promotional purposes. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- We apologize if we've violated any Wikipedia guidelines, but there was no advertisement on our user page; it was a company description. Is that not allowed? Shufflemaster (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- "We are a leading global gaming supplier focused on creating innovative solutions and services for casinos, and compelling gaming experiences for players"--that's not a description of a company in my view. It is very far from neutral. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- There's something we're not understanding. How do other companies have pages (e.g. Best Buy, HP, Sony)? Are you telling us that these pages were created by someone not affiliated with these companies? Also, regarding reliable and verifiable sources, can we not use our Shuffle Master website as a source? All we really want to do is add/edit pages which explain the rules and history of our games (Casino War, Three Card Poker, Let It Ride, Ultimate Texas Hold'em, etc.) Right now the existing Wikipedia pages for Casino War, Three Card Poker, and Let It Ride contain inaccurate information and, as you can imagine, we don't want the wrong information out there. We're not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand. Thank you. Shufflemaster (talk) 21:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is not very likely that those articles were created by the companies themselves, yes. Those articles have been here forever, since long before firms discovered that Wikipedia could be abused like the Yellow Pages. I understand what it is that you want; what you need to understand is that content--it says it here right below my editing window--needs to be "encyclopedic information that can be verified by external sources" written from a "neutral, unbiased point of view." If you do that, there is no problem. BUT: what you did, what I deleted, was in user space--it wasn't an article. I think there's also a difference that you may not be aware of--but see Wikipedia:User pages. As for those articles you mention, I haven't looked at them, but you are welcome to edit them--as long as your edits are encyclopedic, neutral, and verified by references to reliable sources. Drmies (talk) 22:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation. I have another question: what if no reliable sources exist for a given article or part of an article? For instance, the articles I plan to post will mostly contain rules for how to play our card games; not really anything that can be disputed (like the rules of baseball for instance; everyone knows that when a team scores more runs than the other, they win. You can't really dispute that.) In some cases, the only place these rules are posted are on our website, Facebook page, some shoddy third-party blogs, and/or rack cards at casino tables, which are certainly not considered neutral sources by Wikipedia. If this is the case, does that mean we simply cannot post something that has absolutely no verification other than material Shuffle Master produces? Shufflemaster (talk) 22:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Those probably become a problem since they will be consider original research and are not sourced to reliable sources. As I said above, you will be best served by not editing any article relating to your company or products. You may also want to read Wikipedia:Vandalism as some of the edits you are proposing could cross the line there and if they do, you will be blocked. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:53, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- The biggest problem I see with those is that they would not satisfy our notability requirements. Do read that page: "notability" as used on Wikipedia is something of a jargon term and not immediately obvious from the everyday meaning of the word. LadyofShalott 22:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- The short answer to your question is many games you create do not merit articles. If there are no reliable sources, there should not be an article. Also, as noted above, what you are trying to do runs counter to the conflict of interest guideline. Shufflemaster itself definitely would merit an article like Best Buy or IGT have, and in that article various games can be mentioned, but that is probably it. Individual games need a solid base of third party reliable source references to establish notability to get their own articles. A game like Monopoly obviously would qualify for its own article, but any game just released that day obviously would also not yet have any notability yet. Such minor games though can be briefly mentioned in an article about the company. 2005 (talk) 23:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation. I have another question: what if no reliable sources exist for a given article or part of an article? For instance, the articles I plan to post will mostly contain rules for how to play our card games; not really anything that can be disputed (like the rules of baseball for instance; everyone knows that when a team scores more runs than the other, they win. You can't really dispute that.) In some cases, the only place these rules are posted are on our website, Facebook page, some shoddy third-party blogs, and/or rack cards at casino tables, which are certainly not considered neutral sources by Wikipedia. If this is the case, does that mean we simply cannot post something that has absolutely no verification other than material Shuffle Master produces? Shufflemaster (talk) 22:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- It is not very likely that those articles were created by the companies themselves, yes. Those articles have been here forever, since long before firms discovered that Wikipedia could be abused like the Yellow Pages. I understand what it is that you want; what you need to understand is that content--it says it here right below my editing window--needs to be "encyclopedic information that can be verified by external sources" written from a "neutral, unbiased point of view." If you do that, there is no problem. BUT: what you did, what I deleted, was in user space--it wasn't an article. I think there's also a difference that you may not be aware of--but see Wikipedia:User pages. As for those articles you mention, I haven't looked at them, but you are welcome to edit them--as long as your edits are encyclopedic, neutral, and verified by references to reliable sources. Drmies (talk) 22:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- There's something we're not understanding. How do other companies have pages (e.g. Best Buy, HP, Sony)? Are you telling us that these pages were created by someone not affiliated with these companies? Also, regarding reliable and verifiable sources, can we not use our Shuffle Master website as a source? All we really want to do is add/edit pages which explain the rules and history of our games (Casino War, Three Card Poker, Let It Ride, Ultimate Texas Hold'em, etc.) Right now the existing Wikipedia pages for Casino War, Three Card Poker, and Let It Ride contain inaccurate information and, as you can imagine, we don't want the wrong information out there. We're not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand. Thank you. Shufflemaster (talk) 21:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- "We are a leading global gaming supplier focused on creating innovative solutions and services for casinos, and compelling gaming experiences for players"--that's not a description of a company in my view. It is very far from neutral. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- We apologize if we've violated any Wikipedia guidelines, but there was no advertisement on our user page; it was a company description. Is that not allowed? Shufflemaster (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Welcome edit
Hello, Shufflemaster, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.
I notice that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been reverted for this very reason.
To reduce the chances of deletion, you might like to draft your article before submission, then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. To start creating a draft article, just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit that page as you would any other. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.
The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. It is also worth noting that Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which specifically link them to one company or corporation. If your username does have such a name, it would be advisable for you to request a change of username.
If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! You can also just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 22:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)