Talk:2006 World Series of Poker results

message: I removed some of the details on the page because: first, in line with previous discussions at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poker regarding "extra" players, we should not pick and choose other finishers to list. If any are listed it should be by a specific criteria, like top 27 and they have an existing article.  In this case though I can't see the value in making an enormous page like this even more enormous by listing people who came in 50th or 37th.  That is mega-trivia considering this page will be way over reccomended page size. Second, the link to the offical site with the results is plenty. (I also removed horizontal lines that were confusing.) 2005 09:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening comments 

message: I'm a bit confused, because according to the official WSOP site , Event 11 was a $1500 limit hold'em event, and event 12 was a $5000 omaha hi/lo event, but the omaha hi/lo event finished earlier and they are numbered the other way on this article. I changed it but it seems to have been changed back. The reason the Hi/lo event ended earlier may be that that was a two day event while the limit hold'em event was a three day event but they started on the same day. Can someone clear up this confusion? (Entheta 20:43, 9 July 2006 
(UTC))
:What you said is correct.  I suppose starting time is the better ordering criteria, but I really don't have an opinion on that. 2005 20:58, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we stick to the numbers used ont he official website and change it back again? Entheta 21:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Event 11 & 12 confusion

message: Are they going to be posted on the results article, or on the main 2006 WSOP article? --Bigdottawa 05:51, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I think they should be posted like the other events. Final table on this results page, and winner and runner up on the main article. And perhaps we can also allow ourselves to write a little more about the main event here, such as naming famous players who also did good but didn't reach the final table, etc. Entheta 06:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel that the main 2006 WSOP page should keep the format for the main event's results found at 2005 WSOP and other WSOP's pages. This page is unprecedented, but I would advise against going too deep into the results. Essexmutant 09:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

text: We have precedent in all the other articles, established for good reason, so I think we should follow that... anyone in the top 27 with an article gets mentioned, but that's it. 2005 19:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Top 30 actually. Essexmutant 20:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are they going to have 10 players at each table in main event? Afaik the haven't had that at any of the other events. Top 27 seems more logical to me. Entheta 14:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's top 30 listed for every other year's article. Essexmutant 23:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to state the obvious, I thought I remembered 27, but if it has been 30 then of course that is what it should be this year too. 2005 23:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: main event results

message: I went ahead and linked well-known pro Allen Cunningham in the main event final table chart.  I know he is linked earlier in the page, but I do not feel the established WP policy applies so much here, as this article is more like a series of articles than one, smooth essay. That is, users are much more likely to click on the anchor links and miss the first link completely, especially for the Main Event.  Linking AC here will help most users find information they may never have found. ---FoodMarket   talk! 17:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a need to be consistant here. The result of changing this link is that changes would need to be made to every other WSOP page. Does anyone want to volunteer to pick up the consistancy task that this change creates? Essexmutant 17:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been annoying me, tbh.  I know it's general policy but it interferes with the way I like to browse poker results tables. WP:Poker seems to have good control over the pages, so if a local rule was made, I think it could be enforced.  I'd be up for it.  CalG 20:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to take the discussion to the WikiProject. Whatever is agreed needs to be incorporated into Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poker#Consistency. Essexmutant 20:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The linking policy as is creates confusion.  Look at the table for the $50,000 event.  Nine of ten players are linked.  The exception? Phil Ivey, arguably the most notable of that amazing group, behind Doyle Brunson.  Do you think a casual user is going to figure out that Ivey is linked previously in this page without reading the previous entries, or is he going to lose respect for WP for not linking the best-known pro of the group?  I say the latter, and say that all names with articles should be linked in all tables in articles like this that are navigated by anchor links.  I volunteer to do it here if my changes will not be reverted. ---FoodMarket   talk! 16:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I said, there is an impact broader than this one article. Therefore, you should raise it with the WikiProject and establish a clear consensus of opinion. Essexmutant 16:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allen Cunningham link