Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centralized finance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:55, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized finance[edit]

Centralized finance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The term "centralized finance" (or CeFi) is used in crypto circles to designate traditional financial services and institutions (sometimes also referred to as "TradFi"), by contrast to decentralized finance (or DeFi). It is not a notable concept and fails WP:GNG. It's essentially crypto-jargon.

In any case, the article in its current form conflates centralized markets and centralized finance, but the two concepts are not similar: the former is a market structure where securities are traded on a central stock exchange (as opposed to dark pools, payment for order flow, internalization etc.) while the latter is the crypto jargon described above. JBchrch talk 17:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The current content is not properly supported by reliable sources.
Neither Coinbase nor Analyticssteps.com appears to be reliable.
The Corporate Finance Institute source may or may not be reliable, but it is about "centralization" as a business or management strategy. It is not about "centralized finance", nor even about "centralized markets". Using it here would be a misrepresentation of the source.
That leaves Investopedia. It is "yellow" per WP:RSP, but in context it is about "markets", not "finance". As JBchrch mentions, this distinction is very important. Further, the NYSE could be reasonably called a "centralized market" in some contexts, but an adjective and a noun together doesn't always make an encyclopedically noteworthy phrase. More and better sources would be needed. Grayfell (talk) 22:53, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unsupported neologism. Nobody except crypto pumpers uses this term, and even they can't get much traction with it - David Gerard (talk) 00:13, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.