Talk:CoinDesk

News vs Promotion
The Coindesk entry is a very good and also highly relevant given the interest in the technology. I changed the word "news" to promotion, even though promotion of bitcoin could very well include "news" on the subject. The issue and concern has more to do with "What is Journalism?" rather than "What is News?" In Journalism, "Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover." and coindesk does not meet that standard. The purpose of coindesk is to promote bitcoin rather than report on news. --Lfrankblam 22:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * "The purpose of coindesk is to promote bitcoin" - is there a source for this claim? Ladislav Mecir (talk) 01:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There is a discussion over at Talk:Ethereum as to whether CoinDesk is an WP:RS. Editors claim it is not an RS due to it being a promotional site. Wanted to drop a note here in case anyone here was interested in chiming in.Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I have created an RS Noticeboard discussion relating to if CoinDesk can be used as an RS on Ethereum, Reliable_sources/Noticeboard . Please comment Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:35, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

CoinDesk BPI change log
Just a heads up, that section is not meaningful to a reader. A table might be more meaningful which shows how the index has changed over time, or simply it could be omitted. --Lfrankblam (talk) 14:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Consensus convention
reverted my corrections and commented that the multiple sources I used were not reliable. I disagree. They also reverted the data so that it was incorrect again. I am glad that someone else added the changes back, but they got one date wrong so I corrected it. Please let us agree that correct information should be added to Wikipedia not incorrect information and if the incorrect information is there and not sourced (as it was), delete it all rather than remove sources in contention and revert back to incorrect data. Thank you. --YRG (talk) 14:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I removed more poor sources related to this. WE are not using press releases nor yahoo, which generate reprints other sources Jtbobwaysf (talk) 19:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I used sources from the same websites used in other citations that existed in the article before my edit. There are multiple Bloomberg-sourced articles and there is an existing Yahoo article cited. If you do not believe Yahoo is a reputable source, then you should remove that existing article as well. YRG (talk) 17:59, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Reliable sources discussion
There is a discussion at Reliable_sources/Noticeboard which may be of interest to people watching this page. &mdash; Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:09, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I cannot find this discussion. Does it still exist? --YRG (talk) 14:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)