This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article 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
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The link to the Missouri gambling site is now out of date and needs to be updated.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'.
A fact from Ian Matakis appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 September2025(check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Latest comment: 1 year ago32 comments5 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Neither hook meets DYKINT as I do not see how either hook as currently written appeals to non-poker fans, or to people unfamiliar with poker terminology. Please suggest new hooks: I have struck both. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
User:Narutolovehinata5, I don't argue that this article would not get a lot of pageviews. Unless you are a conventionally attractive female poker player who is pictured in the set, there is not likely to be a high viewership. Poker players have comparatively boring bios. A huge percentage of their articles just say they won $X at Y tournament, they won XX event at YY tournament. They often talk about how many bracelets they have won. This seems very mundane. It is very difficult to get significant biographical sketch and just as difficult to find DYK-worthy facts. I can try to rephrase, but there just are not very interesting facts for poker player bios in general.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:04, 18 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
This cannot be emphasized enough: not every article is a good fit for DYK, and not every article has information that can work as a hook. There is no shame in not nominating an article if you do not think that there's anything hook-worthy in it. If a page is unlikely to have any DYKINT-compliant information, it is better to just put time and resources into another feasible article than to try and force it into DYK. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:11, 18 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
Not only is the new hook way above the 200 character limit, but it does not at all address the issues with interest that I mentioned above. Please suggest a new hook with a completely new angle; if you are unable to do so, I suggest you just let this one go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:43, 18 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
One event was online on his phone and the other was live at a casino. He was competing live at the casino while competing online on his phone in another tournament. I'd love help rephrasing from the perspective of someone who does not know poker.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
TonyTheTiger, I think it is for the best if we just move away from that particular hook fact. If a proper wording, particularly one that is non-specialist, cannot be proposed, then it would be better to redirect energy towards something more feasible. Looking at the article, the only thing that might be interesting is the fact that he started gambling at 18, taking into advantage Minnesota's gambling laws regarding its minimum age. However, writing an accurate hook based on that is tricky, and in any case I feel it might fall afoul of BLP if unintentionally. Otherwise, I just don't see this article as a good fit for DYK and I would not oppose this being marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:49, 25 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
User:Narutolovehinata5, I am not use to the new world where DYK only picks the good hooks. I do concede that poker players rarely get a lot of page views. It seems to me that his winning online while sitting a live tournament is part of a big issue for the world of poker. He placed in the money in a lot of online tournaments that year enabling him to win player of the year. There is no source supporting my supposition, but it seems like the next year the rules were changed to limit the impact of online success on the Player of the Year scoring. Starting in 24 your top 10 scoring tournaments count toward player of the year with maximum of one online tournament being included. So his winning while sitting at a live tournament is very encyclopedic. It does not make poker players in general any stronger of an interest for main page viewers, but it is a very significant fact.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:06, 25 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
It is not about poker players having less interest among readers compared to other topics. Plenty of hooks about "obscure" or niche topics still get decent readership from readers, as long as the hook is hooky. The main concern here is simply about the hook meeting DYKINT. Is the hook fact likely to interest readers unfamiliar with poker? That is the million dollar question here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:57, 28 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
(edit conflict) Tony, I suggest you just let this one go. There is no shame if the article never runs on DYK, just writing the article is already an accomplishment. Not all articles are good fits for DYK, we do not need to force them if they lack suitable material. To answer your question though, I probably would have actually, as long as they met WP:DYKHOOKCITE (since both are considered superlative claims). The issue with those two hooks was not interest, but rather possible accuracy (a strong claim like "in the top five" would likely be questioned by other editors). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)Reply
If that was the idea that you were going for, that is a lot better and I am more than happy to let the withdrawal be reversed. With that said, the advice remains the same: do not cram too much into hooks, or you risk running afoul of the DYKINT police.
My apologies to Tony for what happened. I had found the original hook complicated and found it difficult to understand what the intended point was. In hindsight, I should have asked for help in proposing a simplified version of the hook that got the point across. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:26, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
My preference remains ALT3. It is the most concise, and I do not think that mentioning the actual tournament by name is important to the hook fact. I also think that linking to the WSOP will just direct views away from Matakis's article. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:43, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Overall: Article itself is good; image should definitely not be used per WP:DYKIMG. I find the phrasing of "competing in two simultaneously" slightly confusing, because does it mean two others or two inclusive. As it is the latter, I'd suggest the relevant parts to "competing in another at the same time".ALT4 on its own is not interesting, because simply the name of the tournament does not convey anything, but the mention of the bracelet in ALT5 has potential. I'm thus approving only the two following adjusted hooks:
ALT3a: ... that Ian Matakis once won a poker tournament while competing in another at the same time?
Neither hook meets DYKINT as I do not see how either hook as currently written appeals to non-poker fans, or to people unfamiliar with poker terminology. Please suggest new hooks: I have struck both. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
After giving this some thought, I don't see this nomination having a path forward given the lack of suitable hook options, so I am marking it for closure. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:02, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
Given how the discussion happened above, I'd like to request a different reviewer to sign off ALT3, although I'm happy to give it my support. Courtesy ping to Launchballer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
Article itself is good; image should definitely not be used per WP:DYKIMG. I find the phrasing of "competing in two simultaneously" slightly confusing, because does it mean two others or two inclusive. As it is the latter, I'd suggest the relevant parts to "competing in another at the same time".ALT4 on its own is not interesting, because simply the name of the tournament does not convey anything, but the mention of the bracelet in ALT5 has potential. I'm thus approving only the two following adjusted hooks: