Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2007 World Series of Poker results/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Scorpion0422 22:54, 6 June 2009 [1].

2007 World Series of Poker results

Nominator(s): ---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 07:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured list candidates/2007 World Series of Poker results/archive1

NOTE: I will be travelling from Wednesday through Saturday and will have limited internet access. If there are any open issues at that time, I will try to address them when I return. I ask that this not be closed as a failure if on Saturday if there are open issues.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 19:29, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POKER is proud to bring the 2007 WSOP results to be considered for a FL. I think I've prepared this per the guidelines that have been used in previous Poker FL's.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 07:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from KV5

Comments from KV5

There are some MOS issues that need to be fixed here. Some of the ones that jumped out at me are below.

The talk page needs classification (List-class and an importance).
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it's not bold in the list, it shouldn't be bold in the key.
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"This event kicked off the, 2007 WSOP" - no comma, there are a LOT of similar typos. A peer review or copyedit should have been done prior to a nom because of this.
- started---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"3-day, Event" - this is wrong in every entry; no comma, and should probably be "X-day event" (no caps)
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"References" should all be "Reference"; there is only ever one.
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reference section needs to be delineated; split using semicolon-headers into general reference and specific references/inline citations.
- Could you give an example? I'm not sure of what to do here.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Put ;General reference before the general reference, and then ;Specific references or Inline citations before the in-line refs. Also, all of the URLs are formatted incorrectly; they should only be inside single brackets, not double. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Huh? If I use a single bracket, then the citeweb template is not activated. It takes the double brackets to work. As for the general/specific reference, again could you give me some guidance here as well? I've played around with using the ;General reference and ;Specific references but the only thing I saw was the addition of ;General reference. Could you give me an example of where this was used or show me how you want it applied? Actually, I THINK I might have fixed the issue you were getting at. There was one reference that was originally being used for the whole table, I had gone through and cited everything making that reference irrelevant. I've since removed that reference. I still don't know how to do what you asked, but I think I made it a moot point.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - The issue with the square brackets is fixed, and the general reference is gone. So it's all good. Except that the "Reference" section needs to be "References". KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All items in a list need to be able to stand alone, per WP:BUILD; that means every entry should be linked, or at the very least, every blue link. That means in every table.
- WP:BUILD does not make that requirement. Also, BUILD is a guideline, but having a link for every event is not necessary nor desirable. A list can contain information that in the aggregate is meaningful, but in the particulars is not. Each of the tournaments is not individually notable, but combined they are.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Check the link. WP:BUILD is part of the MOS and part of the section reads as follows: "Link only the first occurrence of an item. A link that had last appeared much earlier in the article may be repeated, but generally not in the same section. (Table entries are an exception to this; each row of a table should be able to stand on its own.)" (emphasis mine). I don't see a legitmate reason to WP:IAR here. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 18:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - There is a very good reason not to have an article for each item... most of the people who are on these tables are not notable enough to have their own articles. Most are making their debut appearance at a final table and will never be heard from again. They have zero notability and zero coverage outside of these particular events. Most of the players themselves are not individually notable, but the standings at the final table as an aggregate are.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - You might want to take a look at WP:Poker's position on notability of poker players. You will notice that the winner of each of the tournaments does have a link---that is because as a project we don't believe making the money or even the final table of an open event makes one notable.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Finally, I think you are misreading the section you are quoting. It is not saying that each item on a list has to be linkable, but that you can put a link on each occurance. In other words, Phil Hellmuth appears multiple times on different tables. The only time we have him linked is the first occurance. According to this, we could link him every time he shows up, because each line should stand on it's own. It is not saying that we have to go out and create stubs for every item appearing on a list. That would not be constructive.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:24, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Actually, that might be what you are saying?---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - If you were looking to have items with articles linked, I have now done so.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 05:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        That was what I was saying; I wasn't saying you needed stubs for everyone; that would be crazy. All I meant was that since these are tables, each player with an article needs to be linked at each occurrence, not the first. Sorry if I wasn't clear. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 17:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check date formats. No "02", "04", etc. in dates. They aren't ISO format, and shouldn't be because this list isn't sortable.
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 18:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why are some hands formatted with suits and colors and others without? Consistent formatting is necessary throughout the entire list, or an explanation for each non-conforming hand is needed in the form of footnotes.
- Added a note, the reason is because in the game Razz suits do not matter. The only thing that matters is card rank (A-2-3-4-etc)---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check your captions for numerical consistency ("$5000" vs. "$2,000"; use commas for all)
- Done---Damn, was trying to take a short cut with replace, guess it backfired on me.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"The 7.1 million dollar prize pool and 2.2 million dollar prize" - no reason to write out the amount here when you use currency symbols everywhere else
- Done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Bennett and Korfman made a deal before heads-up play began. Since Bennett had more chips he was declared the winner and Korfman the runner-up. They split the cash evenly with each taking home .[50] With 1,882 entrants, this was the largest Senior's event ever.[8]" - how is this possible?, comma after chips, taking home how much, what's the qualification for senior's events vs. others, there are a LOT of issues here.
- Prize money was missing for some reason, fixed issues.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"With the exception of the main event and the $50,000 H.O.R.S.E. events this event had the highest 1st-place payout of any World Series of Poker event in history." comma after events and change to first-place
- Done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"This event set a World Series of Poker non-main event (and live poker) attendance record with 3,151 entries breaking the previous record of 2,998 set earlier in the, 2007 WSOP (Event 3). At the time it was also the third-highest entry total in all live Poker events behind just the 2006 (8773 entries) and 2005 (5619 entries) main events.[8]" - Comma after "3,151 entries", comma after "At the time, remove comma before 2007 WSOP, commas in 8773 and 5619, and consider a re-word of the second sentence to get the parenthetical comments out of there, they break the flow very badly
- fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:01, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why is Event 55 called the "Main Event"? Explain, with ref.
- Added to prose section.
Why is there an "X" in the hand in event 5?
- Made a note. Basically 5 cards are used to determine the winning hand. There was one card that was not recorded/remimbered.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 4 is broken.
- fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why link only to the 2005 and 2006 results in the "See also"? Is there a navbox to take care of that instead? Should there be?
- Replaced with Major Poker Tournaments navbox.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In the lead, you start out talking about the 2008 World Series. Why? If this is a mistake and is supposed to be the 2007 World Series, then you can remove that link from the See also section.
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since it's part of the title of the event, capitalize "Texas Hold 'Em" in the event names in the lead
- If you are saying to capitalize the Em, then I would argue that is incorrect. The standard used in other sources is to have 'em in lower case.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC) I did capitalize Hold when used in a specific event name.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Texas hold 'em overlinked in the lead.
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:14, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Seven-card stud is a poker variant wherein each player is dealt two hole card" - cards
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"face up cards" - face-up
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"five card hand" - five-card
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Within each of these poker variants" - comma after variants
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Phil Hellmuth won a record eleventh bracelet." - no space before ref
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"third consecutive year," - comma should be semicolon
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Seidel, in turn, won his eight bracelet," - eighth, and comma should be semicolon
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"all time bracelet winners" - all-time
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"At 94-years-old" - 94 years old
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No links in section headers, see WP:ACCESS for why.
- Fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fix the 3 dablinks (find using toolbox).
- I've never done that before and don't see something in the toolbox that appears to look for dablinks... again, looking for guidance here.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:24, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I haven't addressed your concern about dablinks yet, so I'm going to add this comment as a reminder. Thanks for the tip, that is a great tool!---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 19:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the dabs.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hope that these comments give you somewhere to start. This was just a quick, 15-minute once-over, so there may be myriad other issues which could have been fixed, as I mentioned, at a peer review. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Only other thing I can see right now is that the navbox doesn't link to this article. It should per WP:EMBED or it should be removed. You could also consider adding winners' lists to the current poker navbox or creating a new one. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh OK, sorry. One other thing that I just noticed: the logo might fail WP:NFCC #8, but I'm not sure because I'm not huge into image policy. I don't think the logo significantly increases our understanding of the topic, especially with so many free images already in the list. I might consider moving the main event winner to the lead instead. If there is a year-specific logo, then that would certainly qualify, but I don't think that a generic logo does. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I asked a 'crat from Common's about the image a when I brought my first list to FLC a few months ago---there was the same concern. He said that the image was acceptable, but that we needed to make sure that we had completed a rationale for every page where we used it.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I did notice that, but a lot of articles that I have worked on (I'll mention History of the Philadelphia Phillies and Mets-Phillies rivalry as examples) have had fair-use images culled even though a rationale was provided because they supposedly didn't meet Cr.8. That's why I'm concerned. I'd rather someone else more familiar with the policy make the call, but I wanted to bring it to your attention. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I asked a 'crat from the Commons about it. I figured that somebody who was a 'crat there should know the image policies better than most people, as Commons is largely images.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC) As the 'crat is no longer active, I've asked for a second opinion.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support from KV5 (Talk • Phils) 00:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

"each of the event winners received a championship bracelet in addition to that event's prize money" "recieved"-->receives (assuming this custom is still alive)
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Hold 'em is a community card game where each player may " "where"-->in which
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"and the player's own two hole cards" No apostrophe.
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Between 2000 and 2009" Wouldn't it make more sense to say "since 2000"?
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"wherein"-->in which (multiple occurences)
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Deuce-to-Seven" No link?
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Games may ~~also~~ include other"
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the WSOP logo significantly adds to this specific article. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 22:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just returned from vacation where I had internet connectivity issues, will try to resolve these tonight or tomorrow.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 01:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008

Comments –

"Most of the tournaments played at the WSOP are variants of Texas hold 'em. Hold 'em...". For better flow, I recommend merging this part, in the form of "Texas hold 'em, a community card game...". Be warned that this would make the sentence very long, so it might be wise to split the variants into their own sentence.
- reworked---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"and the players own two hole cards to make a poker hand" → "and the player's own two hole cards to make a poker hand."
- reworked---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Another poker variant played is Omaha. Omaha is a version of poker...". This is a similar situation as in my first comment, and I recommend a similar solution.
- reworked---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"a tournament might be described as no limit, limit or pot-limit." Comma after "limit".
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comma after "chop the prize money". Also, Bennett can be linked in the lead.
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Hal Lubasrsky, a blind man, finished in 198th place." Could you please clarify that this was the Main Event?
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Major issue I just noticed: if memory serves me right, the November final table started in 2008, not 2007.
- OMG, you are right! How did I mess that one up!---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The main event champion should be somewhere in the lead, along with the massive amount of money that he won. Giants2008 (17-14) 15:27, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 02:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Truco

Review by Truco (talk · contribs)

Lead

'As a WSOP custom since 1976, each of the event winners receives a championship bracelet in addition to that event's prize money.' -- 'receives' should be singular

Done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'The victor receives a multi-million dollar prize.' -- This sentence links United States dollar but it should be linked earlier in the first mention when used with the $ symbol.

Done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the article looks fine, good work.--Tru co 15:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Although I see that other prose issues were found, I think they have been addressed (as were mine), so the list should meet WP:FL? now.--Tru co 18:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Strong oppose with (hopefully) some kick-ass comments to help turn it to a support...

- "the 2007 series featured " aren't we already clear it's the 2007 series from the previous sentence and the title?
  - Done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it "Texas Hold'em" or "Texas Hold 'em" or "Texas hold 'em" or simply "hold 'em"? All these variants exist in the article.
  - Changed all to "Hold'em", as for Texas Hold'em and just Hold'em, those are interchangeable.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is dollar linked midway into the lead but $ not?
  - Done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "The final table of the Main Event was suspended until November, to allow for better television coverage." I don't get this - why would "better" coverage suddenly be available in November? Do you mean more extensive coverage?
  - Reworded---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "The victor receives a multi-million dollar prize. The winner of the WSOP Main Event is considered to be the World Champion of Poker.[2]" consider merging these two very short and choppy sentences.
  - Reworded---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- variants is overlinked.
  - Reworded---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Last para of lead starts with a bunch of single-sentence trivia facts - not engaging or elegant.
  - Reworked completely... with much difficulty, but I think I did it. You might notice a red link in there for Hal, I am currently writing an article on him, so that won't be red for much longer.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Last sentence of the lead needs a citation.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "What place each player at the final table finished" grim English.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it "final table" or "Final Table"? Don't see why the Table needs to be a proper noun.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Number of Entries" why is Entries capitalised? And shouldn't we have a colon there?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Total Prize Pool", "Winning Hand" etc - so much overcapitalisation...
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Remove space in "Reference: [6]".
  - Done, and checked others.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it No limit, No-Limit or no limit?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ciaran or Ciarán?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Winning Hand: A♠ Q♥ 4♠ A♣ X A♦ 4♣* - this asterisk presumably relates the note following? Not 100% clear.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is "w/Rebuys" actually "with rebuys"?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "a shorthanded format" what does that mean?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Phil Hellmuth won his eleventh WSOP bracelet the most of any player." I think there's some punctuation missing here.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- HORSE or H.O.R.S.E.?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What is "Razz"? And why in bold?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Like David Williams', " what's the apostrophe doing there?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Hughes went on to win a second bracelet in 2008" - this caption is assumptive - went on from what?
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Event 24 - suits don't count again? You noted it last time, but not this time...
  - I'll have to look that up, it wasn't a Razz tournament.
    - I looked at numerous sources, they all contain the winning hand, but not the suits associated with the winning hand. My guess is that the press release from which all of the news articles are based didn't include it. I have added a footnote.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 17:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 1619 & 2541 - need a comma - check others.
  - done, several others had same issue---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Avoid links in headings, see Event 31.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Top Finishers - why not just Top finishers?
  - Changed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "w/rebuys" is not capitalised while its predecessor was...
  - changed to with rebuys per previous comment.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Any reason why "Yuval Bronshtein" is redlinked while you have hundreds of non-linked players?
  - Recent AFD, removed link---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What is "(Seven Card Stud 8/OB)"?
  - fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Note---there has been a fair amount of back and forth on this item from others who work on the poker pages. I changed it to "eights or better" thus making it easier to relate to the lead where it is explained.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 17:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Michael Craig is an American lawyer and author best known for his 2005 book on poker, The Professor, the Banker, and the Suicide King (ISBN 0-446-57769-3)." needs citation and may not even be that relevant to this list.
  - removed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Korfman agreed to let Bennett win the title uncontested, if Bennett agreed t split the prize money" typo and no need for comma in my opinion.
  - done---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "With the exception of the main event and the $50,000 H.O.R.S.E. events, this event had the highest first-place payout of any World Series of Poker event in history." needs citation.
  - Couldn't find it, so removed it.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What's an "addon"?
  - Added links---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:11, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Rambling Man (talk) 19:47, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to get to these this evening.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 20:09, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All comments resolved.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 4 is broken. Giants2008 (17-14) 21:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fixed---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 21:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still uneasy about supporting this. Besides another error I caught (according to the source, Lubarsky finished 193rd and not 197th), the last paragraph has some new problems. The prize/glory dichomoty is only sourced in regards to Korfman and Bennett, not the field in general. Also, the source for Yang's Main Event win doesn't say anything about how money was important to him, and doesn't indicate that he quit his job. Giants2008 (17-14) 23:37, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

197th was the official standing, added link to that. The first ref is good because it talks about the disability. I'll look at the other issues later this evening.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 00:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for the money/bracelets debate, that is a common theme among poker players. Michael Mizrachi is known for his mantra of "Money over Bracelets." David Rheem similarly makes no bones about it. Many of the first timers are just hoping to make it big. Phil Gordon and many of the big names talk more about winning the bracelet than the money. I could give example after example on both sides that it isn't even funny.

As for Yang, expanded section... I wish I could find the quote, "I would say the money. The bracelet to me is a title where you get the notoriety. However, with the money, you can do a lot of good. You can help a lot of people." In a more reliable source.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 04:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The dead-link checker shows that several links are having trouble with their connections. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From what I saw, apparently the software doesn't like the WSOP cite.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 23:30, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.