Talk:Bitcoin Gold: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83 - "→Contested deletion: new section" |
→Contested deletion: new section Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... This page states facts only and is not used as a promotional tool, the info may need to be updated in time but currently all facts stated are either true, or only need minor adjustment. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83|2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83]] ([[User talk:2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83#top|talk]]) 21:25, 12 May 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... This page states facts only and is not used as a promotional tool, the info may need to be updated in time but currently all facts stated are either true, or only need minor adjustment. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83|2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83]] ([[User talk:2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83#top|talk]]) 21:25, 12 May 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== Contested deletion == |
|||
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the Bitcoin Gold project is actually working towards a particular cause... And people need to be able to disambiguate things like Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin Gold. |
|||
They have especially risen to prominence with the recent news of a new ASIC Miner for equihash coins, becoming leaders in the movement to resist the Asic miners. |
|||
I'll find press references to expand the article. |
Revision as of 21:27, 12 May 2018
Numismatics Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Computing: Software / Security Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cryptography: Computer science Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Neutrality
Most of the article seems like an argument for Bitcoin Gold over the other forks of Bitcoin. It was clearly written by someone passionate about Bitcoin Gold, if not Bitcoin itself. Statements such as "That’s why Bitcoin Gold was born, in order to bring Bitcoin mining back to the “people”" are hardly neutral.
If you would prefer that the only individual sections be marked instead of the whole page, then remove the POV template at the top of the article Aaronburro (talk) 17:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
The second paragraph is almost entirely opinion. "The purpose ... is to make Bitcoin mining decentralized again." Who says it's not currently decentralized?
"Satoshi's vision has been superceded..." is not neutral. "Bitcoin Gold will provide an opportunity for countless new people..." is not neutral.
"A more decentralized, democratic mining infrastructure is more resilient and more in line with..." is also not neutral.
Also, speaking of "Satoshi's vision" smacks of a personal stake in the content. Remove references to "Satoshi's vision;" it's irrelevant. At most, you could reference it once as a motivating factor behind the dev community which is pursuing this fork, but note it as their opinion, and cite it.
Remove the conclusion; essays have conclusions, articles don't.
This is a page which should legitimately exist, but it's so filled with editorial and few if any citations, that it just seems like a personal essay on why Bitcoin Gold is awesome and everything else is evil corporate greed trying to control the world. It's not information, it's an argument. Aaronburro (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Introduction
Change this to just be a statement of the project's goals and motivations. Cite those motivations. Remove editorial references such as "We want..." Aaronburro (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Origins of Bitcoin Gold
This could probably be removed, and what little content that remains be moved into the Introduction. Aaronburro (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Proof-of-Work Algorithm
Discuss the technical changes. Don't say why one is better another. Don't discuss the motivations here. Aaronburro (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Difficulty Adjustment Algorithm
Discuss the technical changes. Don't say why one is better another. Don't discuss the motivations here. Aaronburro (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Conclusion
The fact that there is a "conclusion" makes this more of an essay than article. This whole section is opinion, with zero citations to support it. Aaronburro (talk) 18:00, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Removed. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Almost the entire thing was an uncited personal essay
I've cut it down to the intro, which is the only bit with a third-party source. Literally the entire rest of the text was an uncited personal essay. The only reason I didn't PROD the article is because Bitcoin Gold has had some RS coverage, but even that's skimpy - David Gerard (talk) 11:01, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- What does "PROD" and "RS" mean? Chrisclear (talk) 05:51, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- WP:PROD: proposed deletion. WP:RS: reliable sources, the thing every article is supposed to be based on. Please excuse the WP:OMGWTFBBQ - David Gerard (talk) 10:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
about Neutrality
Right now the whole article is just criticism. It is necessary to avoid subjective view to the topic. References and further information about Bitcoin Gold must be added to ensure the neutrality of the article. - Mstroehle (talk) 00:17, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Mstroehle: I agree. But if there is negative content we need to keep it. Essentially we should add content to find balance, but we should not just delete content to try to make it more neutral (in cases such as this when the article is tiny and needing content). That is my opinion. I reverted par of your deletion of content in this edit [1] as we need to keep cited content on the page with good WP:IRS. This article essentially lacks good content for now. Over time the article will get more neutral. Keep up the editing, it is a challenge in the beginning! Let's look for coverage of Bitcoin Gold in the main industry rags such as Coindesk, CoinTelegraph, BitcoinMagazine, as well as the mainstream press. We should be able to find something there. I think you can relax the RS requirements when dealing with non-controversial facts and figures, wallets, etc. Note others might disagree with me (and be more strict), so just be prepared for that. But generally the sources I mentioned above will be considered IRS by most. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jtbobwaysf: I agree. Negative content should be in balance with positive content. Everything has to be based on facts. But the problem of the part I deleted is that it has nothing to do with the Accusation. The deleted sentences was part of the Scam Wallet Issue. Mstroehle (talk) 19:12, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Mstroehle: If it is not relevant to that section, please move it somewhere that it is relevant. Even create a new section if necessary. But to a small article that lacks content, its better to keep all content. In general other editors who went to the effort to add content will be bothered by other's deleting it, so it is better to just move it somewhere else in the article. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 16:52, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jtbobwaysf: Meanwhile I added a short introduction before the deleted sentence. Now it makes sense. Mstroehle (talk) 18:37, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Jtbobwaysf: I agree. Negative content should be in balance with positive content. Everything has to be based on facts. But the problem of the part I deleted is that it has nothing to do with the Accusation. The deleted sentences was part of the Scam Wallet Issue. Mstroehle (talk) 19:12, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the Bitcoin gold project is actually working towards a particular cause. They have especially risen to prominence with the recent news of a new ASIC Miner for equihash coins, becoming leaders in the movement to resist the Asic miners.
I'll find press references to expand the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1001:B11E:43E2:14C4:2491:725E:5234 (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... This page states facts only and is not used as a promotional tool, the info may need to be updated in time but currently all facts stated are either true, or only need minor adjustment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8000:1B00:8D00:D066:ED57:FF27:7A83 (talk) 21:25, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Contested deletion
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because the Bitcoin Gold project is actually working towards a particular cause... And people need to be able to disambiguate things like Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, and Bitcoin Gold.
They have especially risen to prominence with the recent news of a new ASIC Miner for equihash coins, becoming leaders in the movement to resist the Asic miners.
I'll find press references to expand the article.
- Start-Class numismatic articles
- Low-importance numismatic articles
- WikiProject Numismatics articles
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- Start-Class software articles
- Low-importance software articles
- Start-Class software articles of Low-importance
- All Software articles
- Start-Class Computer Security articles
- Low-importance Computer Security articles
- Start-Class Computer Security articles of Low-importance
- All Computer Security articles
- All Computing articles
- Start-Class Cryptography articles
- Low-importance Cryptography articles
- Start-Class Computer science articles
- Low-importance Computer science articles
- WikiProject Computer science articles
- WikiProject Cryptography articles