This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Blackjack article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Blackjack is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 1, 2004. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former featured article |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor
1. Qfit and blackjack in color are self-published websites (henceforth “Websites”) created by Objective3000.
2. The Websites contain much alleged original research by Objective3000.
3. The Websites contain large banner advertisements for Casino Verite software created by Objective3000, as well as links including instructions for purchase with prices.
4. Citations to the Webpages have been found on Blackjack, Card counting, Hole carding, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track (henceforth “the Articles”) either currently or in the past. See Exhibit A for evidence.
5. Objective3000 began working on Wikipedia on 8/31/2007.
6. Before that date, no citations to any page of his two Websites existed on any of the Articles, as evidenced by their wikipedia history.
7. Beginning on 11/15/2007 through 3/2/2008 Objective3000 placed eight citations to his self-published Websites in the Articles (Exhibit A).
8. None of Objective3000’s works in the gambling field have been published by a third party. They are all self-published. Active book publishers have published numerous gambling books, including Cardoza (Las Vegas) and Huntington Press (Las Vegas) and Random House.
9. On December 23, 2010, user QFIT deleted the two citations to the self-published websites inserted by Objective3000 in the article Hole carding. On December 23, 2010, Objective3000 reversed it. On December 24, 2010, user QFIT again deleted the two citations placed by Objective3000 on Hole carding with the comment, “Removed spam links.” On December 24, 2010, Objective3000 reversed the deletion, with the note rvt edit identified as vandalism by user barred for WP:U violation. Objective3000 had entered a complaint for vandalism against the user QFIT, and the user was banned for life on December 24, 2010 (Exhibit: 02:26, 24 December 2010 Orangemike talk contribs blocked QFIT talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite). On December 24, 2010, a user identified by his computer ID deleted a reference inserted by Objective3000 with the note: Removed self linking spam to co. On December 25, 2010, Objective3000 reversed it. On December 27, 2010, the ID’d user deleted the references by Objective3000 with the note “Removed spam links. Objective3000 is linking to his own commercial site as a reference.”
10. On December 27, 2010, in discussing the issue of the repeated deletions of citations noted in paragraph 8 above at the article Hole carding, TransporterMan on the talk page of Hole carding wrote, “links [to the citations]. . . appear to me to be very iffy as reliable sources,” and cited violation of WP:SPS and WP:Sources. TransporterMan suggested posting an inquiry at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Objective3000 let the issue die, with the citations having been removed by the user noted in paragraph 8 above. Daily average pageviews for Hole carding is currently about 55; it is rarely viewed. Daily average pageviews for Blackjack is about 1500. Daily average pageviews for Card counting about 800. The citations to the Webpages remain in Blackjack and Card counting, among others.
11. On 19 June 2021 Objective3000 posted a message asking that Blackjack and Card counting be given protected status (Special:Contributions/Objective3000: 14:20, 19 June 2021 diff hist +317 Wikipedia:Requests for page protection). The action of protected status is taken to cease inappropriate editing on controversial articles, articles about celebrities and political figures, and the such, not to ensure that Objective3000’s citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content be preserved. Both Blackjack and Card counting have the lowest ranking of completed articles, C-class, the editing needs of which are described as “Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.” Yet, Objective3000 wanted both protected.
Wherefore, we pray that the appropriate administrators provide the following relief:
1. Find that Objective3000 is in violation of WP:SPS, WP:SOURCES, WP:PROMO.
2. Find that Objective3000 silences those who attempt to remove the citations to his Webpages by filing inappropriate vandalism or other charges against them, and seeks inappropriate protected status for articles.
3. Order that all citations to Objective3000’s Webpages are allowed to be removed by the judging administrator or any other editor without retribution from any source, including the filing by Objective3000 of charges of vandalism or other charges.
4. Other remedies found appropriate.
Exhibit A. Evidence Objective3000 (now also using O3000 and O3000, Ret.) began at Wikipedia 08/31/2007. Here are ten times he inserted his self-published webpages with commercial content as references into multiple articles in his first few months on Wikipedia.
1. 11/15/2007 inserted into Blackjack first of his qfit references, with banner ads at top and bottom
Over 100 variations exist. 100+ Blackjack variations
2. 12/24/2007 inserted into Hole carding at 23:13 http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-odds-calculator.htm
3. 12/24/2007 inserted into Hole carding at 16:49 The advantage can vary substantially depending on the rules, the percentage of cards seen, and+ the strategies used. http://www.qfit.com/blackjackholecarding.htm
4. 1/19/2008 inserted into Card counting
The following table illustrates various ranking systems for card counting. Card Counting Strategies
5. 1/26/2008 inserted into Card counting
Another interesting aspect of the probability of card counting is the fact that, at higher counts, the player's probability of winning a hand is only slightly changed and still below 50%. [1] The
6. 1/26/2008 inserted into Card counting
Blackjack played with a perfect basic strategy typically . . . 10%-30% of the time depending on rules, penetration and strategy. BlackjackinColor.com True Count Frequencies
7. 1/28/2008 inserted into Blackjack
Techniques other than card counting can swing the advantage . . . since the shuffle tracker could be, at times, betting and/or playing opposite to how a straightforward card counter would. Shuffle Tracking Counts
8. 3/2/2008 inserted into Martingale (betting system)
As with any betting system, . . . of how many previous losses. http://www.blackjackincolor.com/useless4.htm Martingale Long Term vs. Short Term Charts.
On a whim I also examine Shuffle track. Sure enough, the self-published banner ad-full citations were inserted by Objective3000. 9. 12/29/2008 inserted into Shuffle track
Shuffle tracking is an advanced form of card counting. There exist many types of shuffle tracking. http://www.blackjackincolor.com/Shuffletracking1.htm Blackjack Shuffle Tracking Charts
10. 1/28/2009 inserted into Shuffle track
Blackjack Shuffle Trackers Cookbook: How Players Win (And Why They Lose) With Shuffle Tracking] http://www.qfit.com/blackjackshuffletracking.htm "Blackjack Shuffle-Tracking Treatise".
Aabcxyz (
talk) 22:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
BUT THIS IS BESIDES THE POINT. Let us call that person, Mr. W. The creator of qfit and blackjackincolor is advertising Casino Verite software. https://qfit.com/ provides the name of the author as Mr. W. That software is prominently posted at the pages TO WHICH Objective3000 has placed links and which he protects by reversing attempts at deletion. The burden falls on Mr. W to establish expertise via WP:SPS and WP:SOURCE. He is reading these posts. He tried to establish expertise at Hole carding and you can read that discussion at the talk page of Hole carding, courtesy of TransporterMan. In summary,
1. Whoever Objective3000 is, he has placed repeated citations to self-published webpages.
2. Whoever Objective3000 is, those webpages have commercial content.
3. Whoever Objective3000 is, he has failed to establish expertise by the criterion of publication by a third-party.
4. None of my allegations above provided the actual name of Mr. W. That is irrelevant. Points 1, 2, and 3 establish the basis for removal of the citations.
Respectfully, Aabcxyz ( talk) 23:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Wherefore, we pray.... You based your whole tirade on your accusations against Objective3000, yet fail to show that Objective3000 and anyone associated with those websites are the same person.You've gone about this all wrong. You should have put together your arguments about qfit and blackjackincolor not being reliable sources and simply focused the discussion on that issue. If you have evidence to support that Objection3000 had an undeclared conflict of interest, that's a task for the conflict of interest board (although it's meaningless to start anything as the editor is retired). Schazjmd (talk) 23:55, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Third, here's the smoking gun. If you go to
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Objective3000&diff=404456459&oldid=169284509
you will see that Objective3000 is the author of the Casino Verite software in question to which his self-published website refer. He is without doubt Mr. W. That establishes the COI to which you refer.
User:Objective3000: Difference between revisions From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search Browse history interactively Revision as of 01:41, 5 November 2007 (edit) UnqstnableTruth (talk | contribs) (wrong user) ← Previous edit Revision as of 13:15, 27 December 2010 (edit) (undo) (thank) Objective3000 (talk | contribs) Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
+ Author Casino Vérité and some other stuff. Editor here since 2007, if my ancient mind recalls correctly. (bold mine)
________________________________________ Revision as of 13:15, 27 December 2010 Author Casino Vérité and some other stuff. Editor here since 2007, if my ancient mind recalls correctly.
Languages • This page was last edited on 27 December 2010, at 13:15.
In case someone decides to edit that page, I have taken a photograph of it. I hope you and those reading this will go to it to verify the statement "Author Casino Vérité and some other stuff." Aabcxyz ( talk) 00:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
One of the issues is self-published webpages used as references. As TransporterMan pointed out in the discussion at Hole carding, you have to have established expertise by publicatioon by a third party. That's the test that Objection3000 fails. Aabcxyz ( talk) 00:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Other issues you brought up. It's not a question of "better" references. Many articles have NO references. For example, Hole carding. And much of the material to which qfit and blackjackincolor citations are added do not require references. In addition, in my looking at the edits on Card counting and Blackjack I found that Objective3000 removed dozens of references when they displaced ONE of his, and he removed another excellent reference with the comment to the effect "two references aren't needed," but of course he retained the one to qfit.
RE trials and orders, you said the talk area is not the proper venue for trials and orders. Again, can you suggest what are the proper venues, in particular for the issues being discussed here? I really look forward to continued input from you and Schazjmd and others who find these issues important. Aabcxyz ( talk) 01:27, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Aabcxyz ( talk) 03:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Because they are four in number, I should address the four wizard of odds posts. 1. The wiz’s ads, as noted, are for third party casinos. 2. The wiz and #27 earn no money other than toward the web hosting fee. 3. The wiz, according to his Wikipedia page, is in fact the renowned Michael Shackleford. His credentials are vast. His book Blackjack102 was published by a third-paper publisher, the distinguished gambling publishing house Huntington Press. He is a professor of mathematics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, a licensed actuary, a frequent consultant to casinos, and his wizard of odds webpage was purchased from him for well over $2 MILLION. So he doesn’t even earn money for the ads! He has appeared before the Nevada Gaming Board and consults in various capacities, e.g. to game developers. By all criteria, he is a bonafide expert. 4. The 10 citations I noted to Objective3000’s qfit and blackjackincolor were made by Objective3000, including all that were made in the first 6 months of his editing. None were inserted into Blackjack by others before he began editing or during this 6 month period. In contrast, none of the citations to the wizard of odds were inserted by Michael Shackleford. In other words, there is very little in common between the citations of the two. For your benefit as well as to answer the concern of Schazjmd, here is the direct and intimate connection. Objective3000 is Mr. W (not his name, as I don’t want to run afoul of some Wikipedia rule), as shown on his talk page as the author of Casino Verit software. Qfit and blackjackincolor have banner ads and price lists for Casino Verit software, and those webpages note Mr. W as the owner of the webpages. The only citations (that I found) to those webpages came from Objective3000. Most of those who, like myself, found those citations troublesome as new users and deleted them were banned upon action by Objective3000 on claims of vandalism and Objective3000 reversed the deletions. Thank you for your consideration of my Informal Motion. Please let me know if any of my comments here are in violation of Wikipedia rules and I will eliminate them. I try to present only objective, verifiable facts. By the way, my name turns up in RED, and yours turns up in BLUE. Do I have to have a certain number of posts before my name shows up in BLUE? Thanks. Aabcxyz ( talk) 16:27, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
did suggestthese sources for the article.) [ Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 20:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I hope someone who actually cares about the article edits it in good faith.
You are here only to take some sort of retribution against a former editor with whom you have had many arguments.
I'm not going to get into another one of the endless arguments for which you are known
I hope someone who actually cares about the article edits it in good faith.
You are here only to take some sort of retribution against a former editor with whom you have had many arguments.
I'm not going to get into another one of the endless arguments for which you are known
unless it is disputed or reverted.. I think the optics of you aggressively pushing to keep your website as a citation for extraordinarily niche information would be a WP:COI. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 23:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
is too much detail and the type of information”Which is exactly why it is in a cite instead of the article.
which I'm presuming is the "Original Bets Only,"You presume incorrectly. And if you cannot find it, where did you look? Why would you remove non-US rules in EN WP? Why dumb down an article? It is not in the article – but should be in cites. Can't believe I fell into arguing with you again. Say what you wish. You have never understood the purpose of WP. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 00:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The "Original Bets Only" section only cites your website.Yes, there is a dearth of info in the article about non-US casinos which must be increased, not decreased.
The "house edge" advantage down to a percentage - <1 and of two decimal points -- is in the body of the article.Only on a few rules. The cite adds many more. Continue to dumb down the article. Many folks have had these endless arguments with you at ANI. You never convince. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 00:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Anyone can create a personal web page, self-publish a book, or claim to be an expert. That is why self-published material such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), content farms, Internet forum postings, and social media postings are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Exercise caution when using such sources: if the information in question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent reliable sources. Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.
This is your COI.I'm not the one pushing a website that I authored. I agree that some of these other sources are sub-par, but there's a problem with wholesale removing all of the sources in a page, as I'm sure you'd agree. Before you go on another rant about how I have a "COI" against your sources, note that I did not remove "Blackjack in Color," another affiliate of the above-mentioned website, because I believe it provided helpful info. The cites to CV provided extraordinarily basic information that seemed redundant with other sources already provided; in other words, the added cite was not necessary. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 21:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Well, this is getting quite ridiculous. I started editing here as a user 14 years ago yesterday. I have never attempted to add my name to WP and 99.97% of my edits are outside of my field. I do not like talking about myself. But, Wikieditorxxxx is demanding info. So, I’ll provide some. But first, let me clear up the suggestions that I have illegitimately hidden any possible COI. Over a decade ago, I added a COI notice to my user page. It was the only thing on my UP. The OP pointed to it in this discussion. Then came the AfD for an article about the OP. The subject and author of the article started phoning me, sometimes using pseudonyms as he does here. I was quite unnerved by the calls. I was further unnerved when an edit to the AfD pointed out that he had recently been convicted of trespassing related to an obsession with a local official. That edit is still in the AfD archives. So, I removed my personal info. An admin suggested I have it REVDELed. I should have.
Now in answer to the requests demands:
whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.It would be helpful to know more about which aspects of the work, or which specific works, were acknowledged. I found the graphs and mathematical data (even if niche) more inclusion-appropriate than the broad overview of different strategies from Qfit, for which we are better off with published, secondary sources. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 23:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
In "Break the Dealer", Patterson and Olsen published the first book describing shuffle-tracking.The cites in the article are to the 1986 book and Patterson's updated 2001 book. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 22:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
Constructionism is an established legal doctrine which restricts interpretations of a statute only to its precise wording. In other words, if the administrators who established WP:RS and WP:SOURCES wanted to include citations of one’s work as a sufficient criterion for expert status, they could have done so. They did not. Aabcxyz ( talk) 18:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Reliable source noticeboard now has a discussion as to the lack of expert status of Objective3000, and that therefore the references to the self-published webpages qfit.com, blackjackincolor.com, and blackjack-scams.com are in violation of WP:RS and WP:SOURCES. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#qfit.com,_blackjackincolor.com,_blackjack-scams.com Aabcxyz ( talk) 20:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
On the original bets only rule. This is an important rule in Puerto Rico, Korea, all but the Galaxy casinos in Macao, various casinos in Canada, Europe, Australia, and the UK. This is not an American only encyclopedia. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 19:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
what exactly does a controlling player do as it is not made clear from the article ; nor is it made clear what constuties a controlling player although it seems that it is a player whose bet is highest ==BBLLAANNKK TR41N== ( talk) 08:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
It redirects to Blackjack#Rule_variations_and_effects_on_house_edge, but there's nothing relevant to it in that section. 89.64.70.62 ( talk) 22:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Blackjack article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Blackjack is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 1, 2004. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former featured article |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor
1. Qfit and blackjack in color are self-published websites (henceforth “Websites”) created by Objective3000.
2. The Websites contain much alleged original research by Objective3000.
3. The Websites contain large banner advertisements for Casino Verite software created by Objective3000, as well as links including instructions for purchase with prices.
4. Citations to the Webpages have been found on Blackjack, Card counting, Hole carding, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track (henceforth “the Articles”) either currently or in the past. See Exhibit A for evidence.
5. Objective3000 began working on Wikipedia on 8/31/2007.
6. Before that date, no citations to any page of his two Websites existed on any of the Articles, as evidenced by their wikipedia history.
7. Beginning on 11/15/2007 through 3/2/2008 Objective3000 placed eight citations to his self-published Websites in the Articles (Exhibit A).
8. None of Objective3000’s works in the gambling field have been published by a third party. They are all self-published. Active book publishers have published numerous gambling books, including Cardoza (Las Vegas) and Huntington Press (Las Vegas) and Random House.
9. On December 23, 2010, user QFIT deleted the two citations to the self-published websites inserted by Objective3000 in the article Hole carding. On December 23, 2010, Objective3000 reversed it. On December 24, 2010, user QFIT again deleted the two citations placed by Objective3000 on Hole carding with the comment, “Removed spam links.” On December 24, 2010, Objective3000 reversed the deletion, with the note rvt edit identified as vandalism by user barred for WP:U violation. Objective3000 had entered a complaint for vandalism against the user QFIT, and the user was banned for life on December 24, 2010 (Exhibit: 02:26, 24 December 2010 Orangemike talk contribs blocked QFIT talk contribs with an expiration time of indefinite). On December 24, 2010, a user identified by his computer ID deleted a reference inserted by Objective3000 with the note: Removed self linking spam to co. On December 25, 2010, Objective3000 reversed it. On December 27, 2010, the ID’d user deleted the references by Objective3000 with the note “Removed spam links. Objective3000 is linking to his own commercial site as a reference.”
10. On December 27, 2010, in discussing the issue of the repeated deletions of citations noted in paragraph 8 above at the article Hole carding, TransporterMan on the talk page of Hole carding wrote, “links [to the citations]. . . appear to me to be very iffy as reliable sources,” and cited violation of WP:SPS and WP:Sources. TransporterMan suggested posting an inquiry at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Objective3000 let the issue die, with the citations having been removed by the user noted in paragraph 8 above. Daily average pageviews for Hole carding is currently about 55; it is rarely viewed. Daily average pageviews for Blackjack is about 1500. Daily average pageviews for Card counting about 800. The citations to the Webpages remain in Blackjack and Card counting, among others.
11. On 19 June 2021 Objective3000 posted a message asking that Blackjack and Card counting be given protected status (Special:Contributions/Objective3000: 14:20, 19 June 2021 diff hist +317 Wikipedia:Requests for page protection). The action of protected status is taken to cease inappropriate editing on controversial articles, articles about celebrities and political figures, and the such, not to ensure that Objective3000’s citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content be preserved. Both Blackjack and Card counting have the lowest ranking of completed articles, C-class, the editing needs of which are described as “Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.” Yet, Objective3000 wanted both protected.
Wherefore, we pray that the appropriate administrators provide the following relief:
1. Find that Objective3000 is in violation of WP:SPS, WP:SOURCES, WP:PROMO.
2. Find that Objective3000 silences those who attempt to remove the citations to his Webpages by filing inappropriate vandalism or other charges against them, and seeks inappropriate protected status for articles.
3. Order that all citations to Objective3000’s Webpages are allowed to be removed by the judging administrator or any other editor without retribution from any source, including the filing by Objective3000 of charges of vandalism or other charges.
4. Other remedies found appropriate.
Exhibit A. Evidence Objective3000 (now also using O3000 and O3000, Ret.) began at Wikipedia 08/31/2007. Here are ten times he inserted his self-published webpages with commercial content as references into multiple articles in his first few months on Wikipedia.
1. 11/15/2007 inserted into Blackjack first of his qfit references, with banner ads at top and bottom
Over 100 variations exist. 100+ Blackjack variations
2. 12/24/2007 inserted into Hole carding at 23:13 http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-odds-calculator.htm
3. 12/24/2007 inserted into Hole carding at 16:49 The advantage can vary substantially depending on the rules, the percentage of cards seen, and+ the strategies used. http://www.qfit.com/blackjackholecarding.htm
4. 1/19/2008 inserted into Card counting
The following table illustrates various ranking systems for card counting. Card Counting Strategies
5. 1/26/2008 inserted into Card counting
Another interesting aspect of the probability of card counting is the fact that, at higher counts, the player's probability of winning a hand is only slightly changed and still below 50%. [1] The
6. 1/26/2008 inserted into Card counting
Blackjack played with a perfect basic strategy typically . . . 10%-30% of the time depending on rules, penetration and strategy. BlackjackinColor.com True Count Frequencies
7. 1/28/2008 inserted into Blackjack
Techniques other than card counting can swing the advantage . . . since the shuffle tracker could be, at times, betting and/or playing opposite to how a straightforward card counter would. Shuffle Tracking Counts
8. 3/2/2008 inserted into Martingale (betting system)
As with any betting system, . . . of how many previous losses. http://www.blackjackincolor.com/useless4.htm Martingale Long Term vs. Short Term Charts.
On a whim I also examine Shuffle track. Sure enough, the self-published banner ad-full citations were inserted by Objective3000. 9. 12/29/2008 inserted into Shuffle track
Shuffle tracking is an advanced form of card counting. There exist many types of shuffle tracking. http://www.blackjackincolor.com/Shuffletracking1.htm Blackjack Shuffle Tracking Charts
10. 1/28/2009 inserted into Shuffle track
Blackjack Shuffle Trackers Cookbook: How Players Win (And Why They Lose) With Shuffle Tracking] http://www.qfit.com/blackjackshuffletracking.htm "Blackjack Shuffle-Tracking Treatise".
Aabcxyz (
talk) 22:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
BUT THIS IS BESIDES THE POINT. Let us call that person, Mr. W. The creator of qfit and blackjackincolor is advertising Casino Verite software. https://qfit.com/ provides the name of the author as Mr. W. That software is prominently posted at the pages TO WHICH Objective3000 has placed links and which he protects by reversing attempts at deletion. The burden falls on Mr. W to establish expertise via WP:SPS and WP:SOURCE. He is reading these posts. He tried to establish expertise at Hole carding and you can read that discussion at the talk page of Hole carding, courtesy of TransporterMan. In summary,
1. Whoever Objective3000 is, he has placed repeated citations to self-published webpages.
2. Whoever Objective3000 is, those webpages have commercial content.
3. Whoever Objective3000 is, he has failed to establish expertise by the criterion of publication by a third-party.
4. None of my allegations above provided the actual name of Mr. W. That is irrelevant. Points 1, 2, and 3 establish the basis for removal of the citations.
Respectfully, Aabcxyz ( talk) 23:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Wherefore, we pray.... You based your whole tirade on your accusations against Objective3000, yet fail to show that Objective3000 and anyone associated with those websites are the same person.You've gone about this all wrong. You should have put together your arguments about qfit and blackjackincolor not being reliable sources and simply focused the discussion on that issue. If you have evidence to support that Objection3000 had an undeclared conflict of interest, that's a task for the conflict of interest board (although it's meaningless to start anything as the editor is retired). Schazjmd (talk) 23:55, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Third, here's the smoking gun. If you go to
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Objective3000&diff=404456459&oldid=169284509
you will see that Objective3000 is the author of the Casino Verite software in question to which his self-published website refer. He is without doubt Mr. W. That establishes the COI to which you refer.
User:Objective3000: Difference between revisions From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search Browse history interactively Revision as of 01:41, 5 November 2007 (edit) UnqstnableTruth (talk | contribs) (wrong user) ← Previous edit Revision as of 13:15, 27 December 2010 (edit) (undo) (thank) Objective3000 (talk | contribs) Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
+ Author Casino Vérité and some other stuff. Editor here since 2007, if my ancient mind recalls correctly. (bold mine)
________________________________________ Revision as of 13:15, 27 December 2010 Author Casino Vérité and some other stuff. Editor here since 2007, if my ancient mind recalls correctly.
Languages • This page was last edited on 27 December 2010, at 13:15.
In case someone decides to edit that page, I have taken a photograph of it. I hope you and those reading this will go to it to verify the statement "Author Casino Vérité and some other stuff." Aabcxyz ( talk) 00:06, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
One of the issues is self-published webpages used as references. As TransporterMan pointed out in the discussion at Hole carding, you have to have established expertise by publicatioon by a third party. That's the test that Objection3000 fails. Aabcxyz ( talk) 00:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Other issues you brought up. It's not a question of "better" references. Many articles have NO references. For example, Hole carding. And much of the material to which qfit and blackjackincolor citations are added do not require references. In addition, in my looking at the edits on Card counting and Blackjack I found that Objective3000 removed dozens of references when they displaced ONE of his, and he removed another excellent reference with the comment to the effect "two references aren't needed," but of course he retained the one to qfit.
RE trials and orders, you said the talk area is not the proper venue for trials and orders. Again, can you suggest what are the proper venues, in particular for the issues being discussed here? I really look forward to continued input from you and Schazjmd and others who find these issues important. Aabcxyz ( talk) 01:27, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Aabcxyz ( talk) 03:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Because they are four in number, I should address the four wizard of odds posts. 1. The wiz’s ads, as noted, are for third party casinos. 2. The wiz and #27 earn no money other than toward the web hosting fee. 3. The wiz, according to his Wikipedia page, is in fact the renowned Michael Shackleford. His credentials are vast. His book Blackjack102 was published by a third-paper publisher, the distinguished gambling publishing house Huntington Press. He is a professor of mathematics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, a licensed actuary, a frequent consultant to casinos, and his wizard of odds webpage was purchased from him for well over $2 MILLION. So he doesn’t even earn money for the ads! He has appeared before the Nevada Gaming Board and consults in various capacities, e.g. to game developers. By all criteria, he is a bonafide expert. 4. The 10 citations I noted to Objective3000’s qfit and blackjackincolor were made by Objective3000, including all that were made in the first 6 months of his editing. None were inserted into Blackjack by others before he began editing or during this 6 month period. In contrast, none of the citations to the wizard of odds were inserted by Michael Shackleford. In other words, there is very little in common between the citations of the two. For your benefit as well as to answer the concern of Schazjmd, here is the direct and intimate connection. Objective3000 is Mr. W (not his name, as I don’t want to run afoul of some Wikipedia rule), as shown on his talk page as the author of Casino Verit software. Qfit and blackjackincolor have banner ads and price lists for Casino Verit software, and those webpages note Mr. W as the owner of the webpages. The only citations (that I found) to those webpages came from Objective3000. Most of those who, like myself, found those citations troublesome as new users and deleted them were banned upon action by Objective3000 on claims of vandalism and Objective3000 reversed the deletions. Thank you for your consideration of my Informal Motion. Please let me know if any of my comments here are in violation of Wikipedia rules and I will eliminate them. I try to present only objective, verifiable facts. By the way, my name turns up in RED, and yours turns up in BLUE. Do I have to have a certain number of posts before my name shows up in BLUE? Thanks. Aabcxyz ( talk) 16:27, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
did suggestthese sources for the article.) [ Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 20:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I hope someone who actually cares about the article edits it in good faith.
You are here only to take some sort of retribution against a former editor with whom you have had many arguments.
I'm not going to get into another one of the endless arguments for which you are known
I hope someone who actually cares about the article edits it in good faith.
You are here only to take some sort of retribution against a former editor with whom you have had many arguments.
I'm not going to get into another one of the endless arguments for which you are known
unless it is disputed or reverted.. I think the optics of you aggressively pushing to keep your website as a citation for extraordinarily niche information would be a WP:COI. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 23:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
is too much detail and the type of information”Which is exactly why it is in a cite instead of the article.
which I'm presuming is the "Original Bets Only,"You presume incorrectly. And if you cannot find it, where did you look? Why would you remove non-US rules in EN WP? Why dumb down an article? It is not in the article – but should be in cites. Can't believe I fell into arguing with you again. Say what you wish. You have never understood the purpose of WP. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 00:35, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The "Original Bets Only" section only cites your website.Yes, there is a dearth of info in the article about non-US casinos which must be increased, not decreased.
The "house edge" advantage down to a percentage - <1 and of two decimal points -- is in the body of the article.Only on a few rules. The cite adds many more. Continue to dumb down the article. Many folks have had these endless arguments with you at ANI. You never convince. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 00:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Anyone can create a personal web page, self-publish a book, or claim to be an expert. That is why self-published material such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), content farms, Internet forum postings, and social media postings are largely not acceptable as sources. Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Exercise caution when using such sources: if the information in question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent reliable sources. Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer.
This is your COI.I'm not the one pushing a website that I authored. I agree that some of these other sources are sub-par, but there's a problem with wholesale removing all of the sources in a page, as I'm sure you'd agree. Before you go on another rant about how I have a "COI" against your sources, note that I did not remove "Blackjack in Color," another affiliate of the above-mentioned website, because I believe it provided helpful info. The cites to CV provided extraordinarily basic information that seemed redundant with other sources already provided; in other words, the added cite was not necessary. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 21:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Well, this is getting quite ridiculous. I started editing here as a user 14 years ago yesterday. I have never attempted to add my name to WP and 99.97% of my edits are outside of my field. I do not like talking about myself. But, Wikieditorxxxx is demanding info. So, I’ll provide some. But first, let me clear up the suggestions that I have illegitimately hidden any possible COI. Over a decade ago, I added a COI notice to my user page. It was the only thing on my UP. The OP pointed to it in this discussion. Then came the AfD for an article about the OP. The subject and author of the article started phoning me, sometimes using pseudonyms as he does here. I was quite unnerved by the calls. I was further unnerved when an edit to the AfD pointed out that he had recently been convicted of trespassing related to an obsession with a local official. That edit is still in the AfD archives. So, I removed my personal info. An admin suggested I have it REVDELed. I should have.
Now in answer to the requests demands:
whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications.It would be helpful to know more about which aspects of the work, or which specific works, were acknowledged. I found the graphs and mathematical data (even if niche) more inclusion-appropriate than the broad overview of different strategies from Qfit, for which we are better off with published, secondary sources. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 23:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
In "Break the Dealer", Patterson and Olsen published the first book describing shuffle-tracking.The cites in the article are to the 1986 book and Patterson's updated 2001 book. Wikieditor19920 ( talk) 22:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
Constructionism is an established legal doctrine which restricts interpretations of a statute only to its precise wording. In other words, if the administrators who established WP:RS and WP:SOURCES wanted to include citations of one’s work as a sufficient criterion for expert status, they could have done so. They did not. Aabcxyz ( talk) 18:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Reliable source noticeboard now has a discussion as to the lack of expert status of Objective3000, and that therefore the references to the self-published webpages qfit.com, blackjackincolor.com, and blackjack-scams.com are in violation of WP:RS and WP:SOURCES. Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#qfit.com,_blackjackincolor.com,_blackjack-scams.com Aabcxyz ( talk) 20:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
On the original bets only rule. This is an important rule in Puerto Rico, Korea, all but the Galaxy casinos in Macao, various casinos in Canada, Europe, Australia, and the UK. This is not an American only encyclopedia. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 19:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
what exactly does a controlling player do as it is not made clear from the article ; nor is it made clear what constuties a controlling player although it seems that it is a player whose bet is highest ==BBLLAANNKK TR41N== ( talk) 08:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
It redirects to Blackjack#Rule_variations_and_effects_on_house_edge, but there's nothing relevant to it in that section. 89.64.70.62 ( talk) 22:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)