Talk:Erik Voorhees

shapeshift content in the LEAD
I removed your addition of this content to the lead. I recall this content was already in the body of the article. Please explain here why you think that shapeshift corporate content is due in the lead of this WP:BLP. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 22:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The lead summarizes the body of the article. The article passed AFD due to these sources (per your own comments on that discussion). The lead should indicate why a person is notable enough for an article, because that's the purpose of an encyclopedia article. Intentionally downplaying the reason this person has an article at all is indistinguishable from PR. As I've explained to you many, many times, summarize what reliable sources are actually saying. Grayfell (talk) 22:59, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
 * In addition to WP:CRYBLP, abandoning this discussion and going straight to ANI really seems like an attempt to game the system. Your edits seem like an attempt to promote this person and legitimize their cryptocurrency schemes. As you already know, Wikipedia isn't a platform for public relations. Grayfell (talk) 20:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Way too much for LEAD, I moved into article body. Summarize all this in a sentence if you want. See this MOS:LEAD: "The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." This article doesnt provide a summary of another article as well (eg Shapeshift. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I see. thank you @Jtbobwaysf Moem-Meom (talk) 09:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)