Talk:Prima Poker

Gambling: Poker Low‑importance

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Gambling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gambling on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GamblingWikipedia:WikiProject GamblingTemplate:WikiProject GamblingGambling articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This redirect is supported by WikiProject Poker (assessed as Low-importance).

This redirect has been marked as needing an infobox.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this redirect.

WikiProject Gambling To-do:

Current collaborations:

Improve an article to FA

Improve an article to A

Help with the Gambling articles needing attention.
Tag the talk pages of Gambling-related articles with the {{WikiProject Gambling}} banner.
The link to the Missouri gambling site is now out of date and needs to be updated.
Japan section reads as though it was written by the gambling industry - quotes of 160% returns are 'citation needed'.

Opening comment[edit]

It seems that the whole discussion of "is Prima Poker rigged" should be removed unless someone can find a reputable source claiming this. "Critics say" is a weasel word the likes of which we try to avoid here. Furthermore, this discussion is hardly unique to Prima Poker, as similar unfounded allegations against several other online poker houses can be found by digging through online message boards. Unfounded attacks or defenses of Prima Poker should all be removed whenever possible, to keep the article to NPOV standards. ESkog 17:06, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

God yes. It's impossible to play Poker online without running into people claiming the deck is rigged to give action, or bad beats, or whatever... Evercat 17:36, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]