Talk:Andrew Beal
| 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 sourced must 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 rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Andrew Beal be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Biography assessment rating comment
editThe article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 06:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
this part seems unlikely
edit'Beal hoped to force the collective group of pros into such high stakes that their play would be influenced by the amount of money at risk.'
reason: it was a limit game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.84.95.229 (talk) 02:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- It's in the book. Your opinion doesn't affect that. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 17:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- the book was not written by beal; it is the opinion of another writer what beal's thinking was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.84.95.229 (talk) 05:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, first of all, the fact that it was a limit game has NO bearing on the thought process behind trying to out-bankroll the pros; the magnitude of the money involved is what matters. Secondly, it's still in the book. No matter whether you personally feel it to be "unlikely," it's still there and perfectly citeable. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 17:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Expanded content March 2013
editHowdy. Just a note on the expanded content I added to article March 2013. I added a biographical box, expanded content with cites and facts about amount of wealth, holdings of banks, the banks ratings, listing major public subsidiary companies, etc. Also added facts and cites about Beal Conjecture, trimmed older details to keep article roughly same length. Currently looking for a public domain photo to add to bio box. (The wiki FIST search tool looks cool; seems to be searching slowly). Best regards, CMiller, DallasCasey Miller, Dallas, TX 17:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAMiller62 (talk • contribs)
Looking at Twitter it appears Andy may be married again to a Sheila Beal. 205.175.122.188 (talk) 17:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)A poker fan
Sign your talk page sections please
editI've noticed many of you haven't been signing your notes on this talk page. Please sign them by typing four tildes, even if you're an unregistered contributor. Otherwise, you're in violation of the Wikipedia Talk Page Guidelines. Thanks for your time, and contributions.
rJaytalk 20:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
This is a Wikipedia talk page, not a forum
editA Wikipedia talk page is for discussions relating to editing the corresponding Wikipedia article, not for publishing supposed proofs of theorems, for linking to such supposed proofs on other web sites, or anything similar. An editor from Vietnam has recently been using several talk pages of articles to publicise attempts at mathematical proofs. To that editor, please don't. There are plenty of internet forums, blogs, etc where the kind of thing you have been doing would be accepted, but a Wikipedia talk page is not one of them. Continuing in the same way may lead to the range of IP addresses that you use being blocked from editing. That would not be a disaster, since the majority of the other editing from that range is vandalism anyway, but it would be a pity, since there have occasionally been constructive edits from that range, and they would be blocked along with the unconstructive edits. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)