This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Entertainment Technology, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Entertainment TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject Entertainment TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject Entertainment TechnologyEntertainment Technology
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
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
Several paragraphs of text covering the site. Some is routine, such as the coverage of upcoming tournaments. However the source also recognises the company as rapidly growing and on its way to becoming a market leader in online poker. Article is neutral and independent.
Several paragraphs of text covering the site. Describes GG Poker as "online poker giant" and discusses the networks on which it operates and operations. Pokerfuse is a significant and independent source of news for Poker and has been in operation for more than ten years. It covers the game nationally across the united states and has editorial teams that demonstrate a capacity for independence and verifiability.
Again, multiple paragraphs covering the site and these discuss the sites acquisition of the World Series of Poker. It also discusses and provides verification for the companies history including its 2017 launch date and licences.
Total qualifying sources
3
I've got three decent sources here in the assessment table, however the company has received quite literally hundreds of mentions by various decent sources. Cumulatively, they demonstrate notability. I do consider the initial declines to be quite fair, and given the disclosed COI by a company employee this article warranted very close examination. I think the coverage out there is of sufficient depth to justify an article. The coverage is not trivial or incidental such as listings, brief announcements or routine coverage. The company's tournaments, operations, and features for players seems to be receiving considerable attention. One of the criticisms was that the sources are industry sources. Hmmm yeah I kinda see the point but I also disagree. Trade industry sources (aka trade rags) keep members of an industry informed. However these sources go beyond mere employees or members of the industry. While many of the sources are niche, they attract a national or international poker audience. Rather than mere members of industry, they attract an audience of poker players at large. So I do not consider the various sources within Google news to be discountable merely because they are not legacy media and focus on poker. There are many sources which strong editorial teams that focus on a specific "industry" but are not "industry trade sources" such as SimpleFlying, which focuses on aviation to a degree no legacy outlet would be bothered with. Per WP:AUD, there is evidence of at least one national source being the NY Times. Many of the other available sources focus on the United States poker/Gambling industry as a whole. To further help the case for notability, I also note that Daniel Negreuanu is/has been the spokesperson for GG Poker as written by the New York Times. Of course notability is not inherited, but I do think that a highly notable poker player ipso facto endorsing the site demonstrates it is well known throughout the poker world. Also, while age of a company does not necessitate/preclude notability, I consider it a slightly relevant factor in that over 6 years, the company is not a brand new startup trying to boost its image with a corporate vanity piece. I think the article has received attention due to the COI, and justifiably so. But what it really needed was a good looking over by an editor who knows poker (that would be me) and can assess it using that lens. I am satisfied that this organisation is notable based on significant coverage by multiple reliable, secondary, independent sources.
