Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitcoin in El Salvador


 * 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 keep – there's consensus that the topic is notable and that any remaining issues can be resolved through the editorial process. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:21, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Bitcoin in El Salvador

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Most of this article is written like an advertisement or press release, and doesn't belong on Wikipedia. The remainder (the Background section) is already covered at Nayib Bukele, and is therefore unnecessary. YttriumShrew (talk) 19:09, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of El Salvador-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cryptocurrency-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:24, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. The topic meets GNG (do I really need to list sources?), and I don't see anything in the nom that questions it. Deletion is not cleanup. JBchrch   talk  19:42, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep needs cleanup but the topic has received enough coverage for a standalone article by now. jonas (talk) 20:06, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete We don't need a page for X currency in Y country. This article seems like it could be a couple of sentences in the El Salvador article. Maybe someone could spend time discussing the rich history of all of the currencies used in the country - most have been the subject of actual scholarly sources and not just recent news articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:12B0:3000:85A4:3E9A:69B1:D576 (talk) 01:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Wikipedia has guidelines which set forth the criteria according to which we decide whether articles should be kept or deleted. The most important guideline in this area is . This guideline states that "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". As you can see, the general notability guideline does not give editors the discretion to decide whether an article on a given topic is "needed" or "not needed": if an topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources, then it is generally suitable for an article, regardless of what editors think about it. The deletion process is about discussing whether a topic has indeed received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". I hope this clarifies what this discussion is about and which arguments are suitable in this context. Thank you and happy editing. JBchrch   talk  02:08, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I have been editing Wikipedia for about 14 years now. I'd like to welcome you. X in Y articles are almost always of poor form. Thanks for joining the project, we hope you stay :)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:12B0:3000:85A4:3E9A:69B1:D576 (talk) 02:05, 28 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep hugely notable topic covered over a sustained time in numerous reliable sources. This is really an easy Google for anyone but per WP:THREE:, , . Vladimir.copic (talk) 03:26, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Between El Salvador making bitcoin legal tender and the IMF telling El Salvador to not do that at the risk of destabilizing their economy, there very much seems to be enough to write an article that passes WP:GNG. This article will be notable after Bitcoin stops being legal tender in El Salvador, if that happens. TartarTorte 03:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean up. For better or worse, Bitcoin is being adopted as legal tender in El Salvador and the country's president is trying to tie the country's economy to it. Both the government's promotion of Bitcoin - and the protests against it - have gotten a lot of coverage. It's also unlikely that these developments won't continue to impact El Salvador and receive news coverage in the future. It does seem to be very pro-Bitcoin right now, but fixing that is not a job for deletion. BuySomeApples (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I've started improving the article and adding more sources. It's already in much better shape than it had been at the time this article was nominated for deletion. With a little more expansion, it could even be eligible for DYK. BuySomeApples (talk) 07:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep, passes GNG but takes potentially problematic form. I think this content would be better presented as an article on a specific event, named perhaps 2021 adoption of Bitcoin by El Salvador, which avoids the potentially INDISCRIMINATE nature of a 'currency X in nation Y' article. This issue is solvable using regular editing and does not justify deletion. &mdash; Charles Stewart (talk) 16:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, nothing that can't be fixed and easily passes notability requirements to be its own article, first country to make it legal tender. --Killuminator (talk) 21:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC)


 * 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.