Talk:Bitcoin XT

There's almost no content, and what's there is factually inaccurate
BitcoinXT has been around for a long time. In the factually inaccurate world of the article, BitcoinXT has only existed since it pulled in the big block patch. Chris Arnesen 13:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Everyone and anyone is welcome to help improve this article. 😏 -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 08:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * : I should've been more constructive with my comment. I appreciate that you've added more information about the earlier history of BitcoinXT. Unfortunately, I don't believe the information is verifiable in the Wikipedia sense of "published by third-party sources with a reputation for strong editorial policies". The "references" all point to GitHub commits, releases, etc. That would make them "original research" and therefore inadmissible. See here No_original_research Chris Arnesen 13:20, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * No worries. A more relevant guideline section is Notability.  It's a fair assumption that the software has passed the notability threshold per the multiple significant writeups in independent reliable sources.  (If anyone disagrees then an Articles for deletion discussion would be recommended).   While it is best to use those independent sources whenever possible, primary sources are entirely acceptable to use for verification purposes.  Even better is to use a reliable independent ref and a primary ref together to verify the same information! 😊 -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 14:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

This should not be a separate article
BitcoinXT is Bitcoin, unlike Core supports would like to have you believe. This should be part of the main Bitcoin article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaperWario (talk • contribs) 05:09, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Or maybe Bitcoin Core is notable enough for its own article, too? --  1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 11:10, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Either should be part of the main Bitcoin article or split Bitcoin Core as its own article. Chris Arnesen 02:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Bitcoin XT is long defunct and the article is massively out of date, should this be deleted?
Bitcoin XT stopped being Bitcoin software over two years ago and it was abandoned over a year ago. It hasn't seen a single update in a few days shy of a year now. The article contains many outdated and simply incorrect claims and it isn't likely to be corrected or maintained because the article is about a long defunct obscure piece of software. Is there any good reason to not delete the article? --Gmaxwell (talk) 00:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Agree that it should be deleted. It probably never met the criteria for notability in the first place. --McZusatz (talk) 14:51, 12 December 2019 (UTC)