Talk:Ruth Parasol

Vote for Deletion

This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 01:19, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Blackjack Fairness issue

An anonymous user has repeatedly added claims that PartyGaming blackjack software is not fair: she i.e. fair. look here http://www.undertherock.com/profile/1179649 iGlobalmedia, the gambling company founded by Ruth Parasol that now oversees Partypoker.com, was originally declared to have blackjack and roulette software that was not fair. "My results clearly showed they weren't fair," says famous Las Vegas actuary and casino consultant Michael Shackleford[also known as the 'Wizard of Odds']. An official from iGlobalmedia then acknowledged Shackleford's allegations as true, but dismissed it as a software mistake and not intentional. Regarding the legitimacy of Partypoker operations considering iGlobalmedia's blackjack and roulette operations, Schwartz of the Center for Gaming Research said a history of disputes should give players pause.

This is not the proper article for such issues. Something like this belongs in the PartyGaming article, and it MUST include properly cited sources, not just a bunch of name-dropping. SmartGuy 13:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

An anonymous user has repeatedly added claims that PartyGaming blackjack software is not fair -False, I said specifically iGlobalmedia 'originally' offered unfair blackjack. You change my word from 'iGlobalmedia' to 'Party Gaming', which robs the reader of the understanding of time frame. Anyway, "They" did 'originally' offer "unfair" blackjack software, as per respected actuary Shackleford. [In fact, you forgot to mention I said they also offered unfair roulette...which undisputedly they did] These FACTS were not disputed with iGlobalmedia, and I added iGlobalmedia's response at the time...which was included in the linked reference I provided.

I don't know what relevance Ruth Parasol has to the World, and Wikipedia, if not within the context of the company that made her famous - the company that makes Ruth Parasol have an impact on most of those researching her...iGlobalmedia[now renamed Party Gaming]. Your suggestion to offer my information in the PartyGaming article is of course proper but entirely irrelevant as to whether it should be used in relation to Ruth Parasol. To essentially eliminate such essential contextual relevant material, as you have, from Ruth Parasol, equates to manipulation of the truth.

'sources'

Maybe you could bother to check the information for yourself, instead of eliminating it. My 'sources' are open and generally accepted knowledge. My 'sources' include an undisputed LA Times investigation on the subject. EVERYTHING I put down was in the Newsmax article I referenced. A very simple Google search will discover ALL of this. You can contact Mr. Shackleford for yourself if you take exception, no? Shackleford was referenced in the Newsmax article you (oh so kindly) allowed me to keep in the links area(after you first chose to wipe it out),...sooooo where do you want that reference put besides the links area?...or maybe you just eliminated the information with no regard to 'sources' because eliminating the information suits you. If there was a symantic problem with the presention of the link, why not correct it instead of eliminating it? Something's fishy here Smartguy. Looking at your volumous edits, you obviously have extensive contact in the poker world, and curiously you seem to almost exclusively exist to edit poker information here on Wikipedia. You curiously have not answered my question, "Do you have any affiliation with Party Gaming?" -user Bill0756 Aug 8 2006

Relax. I'm not trying to start an edit war here, and I think that you are confusing me with another user. I have made exactly 1 edit to things that you added to this article. This is the first time that you have ever addressed me. I noticed that someone did ask another editor "Do you have any affiliation with Party Gaming?" but I believe that the question was directed an editor that goes by the name 2005, not at me. At any rate, no I am not affiliated with PartyGaming other than the fact that I play there.

Re: the blackjack issue - my comments above meant that the issue should probably be presented in the PartyGaming article, not here. I just think that the matter belongs in the other article, not this one, since it encompasses more than just Ruth Parasol.

1 more thing - to sign your name at the end of a comment, use 4 tildes "~" - That adds your Wiki name and a link to your Talk page. Anyone who wants to direct comments specifically to you can do it there, rather than on the article's Talk page. SmartGuy 15:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

This article is about Parasol, and is not a place for you to make bad faith comments or add information not appropriate to the article. Why are you trying to add this information here instead of the Party Gaming article? What is your motivation? (Rhetorical question since I don't care.) Please add content to the articles that is directly relevant to the topic of the article and add content to linked articles that is relevant to the linked articles. The iGlobal/Wizard stuff is relevant to the Party Gaming article and can be put there with the proper cite. That isn't the issue. The issue here is you putting material in the wrong place, and then your bad faith response to its removal. Just do things properly and you won't have any problems. 2005 19:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

She is a good person — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.160.176.66 (talk) 11:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)