Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Cryptocurrency
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Cryptocurrency. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
- Adding a new AfD discussion
- Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
- Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
- You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Cryptocurrency|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
- There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
- Removing a closed AfD discussion
- Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
- Other types of discussions
- You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Cryptocurrency. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
- Further information
- For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:| watch |
Cryptocurrency
[edit]- CoinGecko (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable crypto nonsense. Even by the low bar of our crypto standards, it’s still not notable. Lacks any meaningful independent coverage and is, like most crypto in 2024, a dime a dozen. GRINCHIDICAE🎄 20:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, and Malaysia. Shellwood (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: CoinGecko has been used in academic research ([1], [2]) and their API has brief tutorials in various books ([3], [4]). The coverage within each source is thin, so I'm not sure whether it's enough for a GNG pass. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
- Gate.io (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An article on a crypto-exchange company, created in March after a previous instance was deleted by AfD in February. Although this instance is not a WP:G4 repost, the text covers much the same ground and most of the references were available for consideration in the Jan 24 AfD. Since then there is a pros-and-cons Business Insider product review, though it is marked Paid non-client promotion. I am unconvinced that the available coverage meets WP:CORPDEPTH - and the special considerations for Crypto - so it seems appropriate to open a discussion on whether or not to overturn the Feb 24 AfD decision as to attained notability. AllyD (talk) 15:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency, Companies, Hong Kong, and Caribbean. AllyD (talk) 15:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Still a non-notable crypto exchange thing. The first four news items uses for sourcing aren't about this exchange, only mentioning it. This is PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 19:23, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pump.fun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 December 9#Pump.fun, while apparently G4 didn't apply there still seemed to be agreement that the recreation deserved a new discussion at AfD rather than slipping quietly into acceptance. So here we go. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency and Websites. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I believe that the page should not be deleted, especially after the amount of coverage from notable sources this month regarding the conduct of the platform's users. I've improved the page with some small edits to fix some issues that I have with it, and I'll work on finding more sources and expanding the article tomorrow.
- LemurianPatriot (talk) 04:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep sourcing looks good. The New York Times article is lengthy investigative journalism about this site and its origins. I don't know why people want to delete it given the sourcing, the nominator doesn't provide a rationale for deletion. --Here2rewrite (talk) 13:51, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as the nominator doesn't really give a reason to delete it. History6042😊 (Contact me) 16:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy keep per lack of nomination rationale. Madeleine (talk) 01:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps you placed this on the wrong discussion. @Pppery explained exactly why they nominated the article. Star Mississippi 02:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Here's my take using {{source assess table}} (somewhat hastily done, as Bloomberg is unfortunately paywalled). I would say weak keep for now - I think the coverage in Bloomberg, the New York Times, Gizmodo, Ars Technica, and Wired meets WP:NCRYPTO. But it's unclear to me whether this is just a passing fad or whether long-term notability is here to stay. Duckmather (talk) 04:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
