Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NEM (cryptocurrency)

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. I find the arguments countering the single keep comment persuasive. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:50, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NEM (cryptocurrency)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Notability not established, only reliable sources are Japan Times and Wired, and they only cover it in their isolated pieces. The Japan Times piece is just reporting on a crime, and it doesn't provide any citable in-depth coverage of NEM. The Wired piece relies on statements by people involved in NEM, and Wired is a pop magazine, they cannot be trusted to verify claims about distributed consensus. The Forbes source is a blog, it cannot be cited. Sources must be satisfy WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND, but they don't. See also the arguments of the previous deletion debate. Ysangkok (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 22:52, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Linking the previous delation debate in question. Jumpytoo Talk 01:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SIGCOV - deprecated sources like blogs, white papers, and Forbes. Bearian (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment probably Wikipedia:Too soon --Devokewater (talk) 11:18, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Devokewater: by which metric is it too soon? There is no more activity the repos of NanoWallet, nem.core, NEMiOSApp, NEMAndroidApp, nem-lightwallet. How can it be too soon if they are no longer developing the code? --Ysangkok (talk) 15:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Per reasons in the previous AfD. A few of the sources in the article seem to be reliable. I also found a few reliable sources about it: [1], [2], [3] and [4]. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Superastig: How is securities.io, which invites you to partner with them (pay-to-publish), reliable? Why is btcmanager.com more reliable than say bitcoinmagazine.com, which we do not allow? Also, please respond to the questions for you I posted at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/PotCoin. --Ysangkok (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
These are not RSes, and so do not substantiate the claims of RS coverage - David Gerard (talk) 11:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - David Gerard (talk) 11:51, 27 October 2020 (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.