A fact from United States v. Scheinberg appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2011 ( check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that on April 15, 2011, United States v. Scheinberg resulted in the end of online poker play for United States residents on the three online poker sites that account for approximately 95% of the market? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/April.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Gambling: Poker Mid‑importance 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 articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Poker (assessed as High-importance). An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. WikiProject Gambling To-do: history watch purge Current collaborations: Improve an article to FA Improve an article to A Help with the Gambling articles needing attention. 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'. Internet culture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States Low‑importance 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The article as currently written is inaccurate and fails to properly distinguish between the criminal indictment from the companion civil case (11 cv 2564). Furthermore, the indicment was handed up on March 10, 2011 not on April 15, 2011 as has been stated in the article and widely reported. Obviously a number of the people reporting on this matter didn't bother to actually read the indictment or the civil complaint. The indictment was simply unsealed on April 15th. Finally, despite what is being reported in some places, there are not currently criminal charges pending against Full Tilt, Absolute or PokerStars pursuant to the indictment. The criminal charges (at least for now) are limited to the named principals while various civil claims are being pursued against a number of companies (including Absolute, Full Tilt and PokerStars). As too often seems to happen on Wikipedia, there appears to be rush to be first rather than correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.84.57.45 ( talk) 03:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks for pointing this out. I've fixed it somewhat I hope. -- Kendrick7 ^talk 18:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Good work. I have got the regular people (Black Friday) redirects pointing here. Can you take care of the various possible US v Pokerstars redirects.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 05:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Thanks. It's not too serious as the number of mentions of PokerStars means both Google and Wikipedia search rank this article very high. I only made United States v. Scheinberg et al because some parser of the chat I was in assumed that the ending period wasn't a part of the link. -- Kendrick7 ^talk 07:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Scandals don't yet have infoboxes. However, I attempted to model this one on the Rod Blagojevich corruption charges infobox detail. I was a bit surprised when all the infobox summary detail was deleted. Feedback would be appreciated.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 14:01, 24 April 2011 (UTC) reply

You just repeated lists in the article, that were almost literally next to each other. That's not what infoboxes are for. Also, this article is not about a "scandal". 2005 ( talk) 22:42, 24 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Agree that it's not a scandal. There's probably a law suit / criminal case template? -- Kendrick7 ^talk 00:34, 25 April 2011 (UTC) reply

I know that there is a {{ Infobox SCOTUS case}} template. Maybe we can use something in here: Category:Court box templates.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 01:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC) reply

I have added {{ Infobox United States District Court case}} because this case is pending before a U.S. District Court. The case citations are a little off at the moment since it hasn't been scheduled for trial yet. Typically, the infobox is designed for cases that are scheduled for trial (so there is a docket number) or have been decided (so there is a case citation). Due to the extraordinary pre-trial publicity for this case (giving it appropriate notability for Wikipedia), the indictment number is currently listed. Once this is assigned a docket number, that number should be used in place of the "10 Cr. 336 (2011)" text. OCNative ( talk) 20:48, 25 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Kendrick7, I see you have tinkered with the WP:LEAD. In some WP:FA reviews, I have been encouraged to have three paragraphs that summarize the article and a first paragraph that summarizes theses three paragraphs in a sense. If we go with that style we can return to the more conventional format of all bold alternate names in the first paragraph. What do you think?-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 05:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC) reply

OK, I'm not one to sacrifice readability for style, but I've done a rewrite that's a little less dense which meets your suggestions. -- Kendrick7 ^talk 19:15, 25 April 2011 (UTC) reply

We are headed in the right direction.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 19:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC) reply

how about adding a section or at least some links, that compare this action with the deplorable history of Prohibition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.12.195 ( talk) 00:46, 30 June 2011 (UTC) reply

What prejudice? It is a good thing that online gaming sites accused of cooking their books know nothing about cooking wikipedia. (Stated with sarcasm.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.76.165 ( talk) 19:15, 27 May 2012 (UTC) reply

Where in the entire article does it say anything about prejudice? JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San ( talk) 19:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC) reply

My guess is this is referring to the "Basis for the Case" section, which pretty clearly violates NPOV by repeating the characterizations and spin of the defenders of online poker on such issues as whether the games were conducted in New York and whether the bank fraud allegations either required a person to be defrauded or sufficiently alleged one. 64.134.224.123 ( talk) 20:20, 7 May 2013 (UTC) reply