Talk:Terry King

Proposal to delete
{{prod}This entry is NOT noteworthy simply because you win 1 tournament. } Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.244.71.77 (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * But you can't propose to have it deleted a second time. If you think it should be deleted, here's what you should do. -- Hoary (talk) 00:33, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And I think most people would disagree with you on that... winning a WSOP Bracelet is the most prestigious thing a person could win in poker. People may not remember who wins a WPT/EPT/US Open event, but WSOP bracelet winners are notable.--- I'm Spartacus!  PoppaBalloon 00:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * NB I'm not proposing deletion or suggesting that it should be proposed, merely saying that if somebody wants to propose deletion, this is the way to go about it. (Meanwhile, this person doesn't seem to approve of King, and there's more here. It's all rather confusing.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, shouldn't have indented my comment, it was really addressed to the IP. As for DTtower, I think he has a problem not with Terry King, but rather that it isn't the article on the photographer that was speedily deleted (by somebody else) a few weeks ago as non-notable.--- I'm Spartacus!  PoppaBalloon 01:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine, fine. I've written more just now at User talk:Dttower. -- Hoary (talk) 01:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that in order to put information onto/into Wikipedia, that you had to be credible, noteworthy. Meaning, if there is a David Frost who wins some obscure tennis match, while it may be credible, it isn't noteworthy. If someone, of the same name David Frost, is elected to the Senate, then it would be both credible and noteworthy. As I mentioned before I have worked with over 10 individuals to get their CREDIBLE and NOTEWORTHY information on Wikipedia. However, EVERY time it seems someone deletes it. Then, I came across this entry, and for some, odd, strange reason - it is allowed to remain with a solo, single entry. Now, the REASON I am very upset with this is because I am trying to get http://www.kingcello.com/ on Wikipedia and I would LIKE to put an entry it under "Terry King"...and as you can CLEARLY SEE from this website, he is CREDIBLE (there are MANY high level sources) and VERY NOTEWORTHY. However, I cannot, because Wikipedia in their grand wisdom has instead allowed some poker player to put their 1-reference,0Noteworthy entry instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dttower (talk • contribs) 02:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

OHHHHH I get it....  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:I%27m_Spartacus! (very bottom) Sparticus is a poker player. Great job there! Way to let your personal affiliates cloud the better judgement of Wikipedia... I couldn't for the life of me figure out WHY it was allowed as most admins are very very strict. I guess I need to find an Admin that plays the Cello in order to trump you. Well, too much trouble for me. Enjoy this crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dttower (talk • contribs) 02:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:POINT, you really are going about this the wrong way, you're attacking this article as well as its creator simply because the article in question shares the same name of an article you wish to exists, there are better ways to argue your belief that Cellist Terry King should have an article without being disruptive please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors and try to remain calm when things don't go your way.▪◦▪ ≡S i R E X≡  Talk 15:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)