Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pure Bluff Catcher

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:15, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pure Bluff Catcher

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Pure Bluff Catcher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable poker hand? I'm not even finding what to classify this under in the bot, nothing for notability regardless. Oaktree b (talk) 20:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 20:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify. Brand new article that clearly needs some work. It's touching on notable concepts that are not present in Bluff (poker) right now. There's a possible redirect target at Garrett Adelstein#Adelstein-Lew Controversy, but that's very specific and can't cover the broad concept here. —siroχo 23:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don't understan your comment about the "non-notable poker hand". the article is providing information about the "Pure Bluff catcher". Could you specify what excatly should be imrpved in the article? NicoleBaker37 (talk) 06:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I removed some cruft from the article but A) the term is commonly used (I'm not a player but I know it quite well) and B) there is sourcing out there. Sources for bluff catcher/pure bluff catcher:
  • [1] A definition of a bluff catcher
  • [2] Definition of a "pure" bluff catcher.

I'd say redirect to Glossary of poker terms#B is probably the best outcome. Or merge with a one-liner at #P. Hobit (talk) 17:14, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would also support either of these redirect options as well, as they preserve the history. We could even draftify alongside this redirect (though then a move to mainspace requires an admin). —siroχo 23:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify or redirect since it's a new article; the author needs to work more on showing how this meets GNG. No footnotes, general bibliography, this is not up to modern standards for articles we accept. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:36, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify: Notability is not adequately demonstrated in the article. It‘s also largely written like a guide or manual, which is inappropriate. Actualcpscm (talk) 13:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.