Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poker dealer

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Sango 123 23:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poker dealer

This article was nominated by Cocopuffberman (talk · contribs), but not completed. I have added this header and listed it on the AfD page. I vote Keep as a notable/verifiable topic. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 01:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. This article is very well written, and in my opinion, is a good contribution to Wikipedia. This page should be merged with cropier. I don't see a difference between the two pages except the poker specification. I think in the cropier page there should be sections that describe the role and responsibilities of dealers in different casino games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cocopuffberman (talk • contribs) May 23, 2006
Keep. I don't object to croupier being expanded, but the word croupier is never used for poker dealers, and little of the information in this article is extensible to other dealing positions in a casino. There is room on wikipedia for both articles in my opinion. Kymacpherson 04:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Croupiers are not poker dealers. Poker dealers are not croupiers. You might as well merge an article about automobiles with one about tractors. 2005 05:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per 2005. Essexmutant 18:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Card dealing and Merge the "Professional dealers" and most of the "Responsibilities during a hand" sections to Croupier. Most of the content on this page is general to any card game, not just poker; and croupier is just a french word synonymous with dealer (if you hear croupier and can only think stickman, that's your problem). Ewlyahoocom 21:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all the above. Thetruthbelow^(talk) 02:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well written article about a specific and notable subject. — TheKMan^talk 03:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable, interesting. JohnM4402 06:31, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (possible speedy keep), very notable concept, well-written article. JIP | Talk 11:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Kymacpherson. Aguerriero (talk) 15:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable topic, well written. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per above Crazynas 15:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly a notable phrase. --Wisd e n17 23:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.