- 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 was delete. j⚛e decker talk 03:30, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Cryptonator
- Cryptonator ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Originally prodded by me because "he coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (organizations)/ Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement." I stand by this description. Deprodded by User:Pishcal who stated on Talk:Cryptonator "I removed the proposed deletion template, it's been covered in multiple news articles". I don't think that the coverage in the article is sufficient; they are all niche publications/blogs about cryptocurrencies, and neither suggests that this topic has gained any notability outside it's own little world. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 16:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 16:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete press releases should not form the basis of an article -- Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out ( talk) 19:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker talk 00:26, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 03:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. When removing a prod, it is expected that improvements will be made to the article to address the issues identified in the prod. Other than the talk page claim of "multiple news articles", I am not seeing any improvement. And I don't see the existing news sources as having any semblance of a broad audience. WP:CORP specifically excludes "media of limited interest and circulation" as establishing notability. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 04:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 was delete. j⚛e decker talk 03:30, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Cryptonator
- Cryptonator ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Originally prodded by me because "he coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (organizations)/ Wikipedia:Notability (software) requirement." I stand by this description. Deprodded by User:Pishcal who stated on Talk:Cryptonator "I removed the proposed deletion template, it's been covered in multiple news articles". I don't think that the coverage in the article is sufficient; they are all niche publications/blogs about cryptocurrencies, and neither suggests that this topic has gained any notability outside it's own little world. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 16:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 16:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete press releases should not form the basis of an article -- Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out ( talk) 19:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker talk 00:26, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 03:57, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. When removing a prod, it is expected that improvements will be made to the article to address the issues identified in the prod. Other than the talk page claim of "multiple news articles", I am not seeing any improvement. And I don't see the existing news sources as having any semblance of a broad audience. WP:CORP specifically excludes "media of limited interest and circulation" as establishing notability. ~ Amatulić ( talk) 04:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- 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.