The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was delisted by SchroCat 08:41, 29 January 2015 [1].

Notified: User talk:2005, WT:POKER, WT:GAMBLING

Several issues were raised in this talk page post from April but none were acknowledged. The main concern is that there are a lot of stretches of unsourced material; the entire "Variations" subheader is completely unsourced; terms such as "kicker" are not defined or wikilinked to clarify for those of us who do not play poker; and sources 1-4 (Suffecool, Poker Tips, PokerWokrs, and Brian Alspach) do not appear to be reliable sources. The page was promoted in 2008, and no maintenance seems to have been done since. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 06:09, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunate delist - I'd be lying if I said I haven't used this article to help me learn about poker hands as recent as a year ago. I'm not a big card person. As the nominator explains, this isn't up to current standards. There's a good list on the talk page of some places to start if anybody would like to bring it back up, but the lack of inline citations and messy formatting is enough to remove the gold star for now. Gloss 18:30, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist per the comments made here and on the talk page (months ago), which have not been acted upon. Not up to current standards. Bencherlite^Talk 16:32, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist as per above. Too few citations. Cowlibob (talk) 12:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist per the above points. Sub-par citing. - A Texas Historian (Talk to me) 16:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been delisted as a featured list, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. - SchroCat (talk) 08:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was delisted by SchroCat 08:40, 29 January 2015 [2].

Notified: Gary

I am nominating this for featured list removal because the list is in pretty poor shape, with a blacklisted links template on it for a few months now, a lot of messy citations and missing fields in the references. Also some dead links. Not up to par with current featured lists. Gloss 03:44, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist: it's been over two months now with no improvements, and the citations are in an incredibly poor state. - A Texas Historian (Talk to me) 16:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist Requires a whole lot more citations and the lead probably needs expansion and reworking as well. Cowlibob (talk) 23:30, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been delisted as a featured list, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. - SchroCat (talk) 08:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.