Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gatecoin

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gatecoin[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)

No evidence of notability. Previously PRODed by David Gerard, removed by IP editor. No sources besides routine coverage on cryptocurrency price movements and the company's closure. Alpha3031 (t • c) 10:58, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I cab show my Gatecoin account to prove the information is 100% accurate, the only people wanting this removed are the corrupt people who ran Gatecoin and don't want the world knowing the truth about them. But rest assured everyone will know Aurelien, David and the rest if their names, we'll make sure of that so they do do such a thing again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.246.94.248 (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- The thing you have to do if you want it to stay is to find actually mainstream WP:RSes that cover it - David Gerard (talk) 12:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@91.246.94.248: Look, we understand if you think something needs to be known by people, but Wikipedia isn't the place to do that. Contact news agencies or start a blog if you need to, but Wikipedia doesn't accept journalism, no matter how important it is to get word out there. Heck, there are even other wikis that do not have our strict notability policies. Once it is covered significantly by reliable sources, then a wikipedia article will probably be accepted. The notability criteria for organizations are especially strict and "covering it would be good" isn't really a strong argument. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:17, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and my PROD - David Gerard (talk) 12:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:39, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: does not meet the relevant notability guidelines. Sourcing is WP:SPIP. --K.e.coffman (talk) 17:08, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:56, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A non-sourced article about a non-notable subject; created by a kamikaze account, "improved" by another, then capped by a third one. Hope the check clears, though. -The Gnome (talk) 12:57, 23 March 2019 (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.