Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitcoin network analyzed by network science


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 07:37, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Bitcoin network analyzed by network science

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm not 100% sure if this should be deleted or not, but feel it's worth at least discussing. Reads like an essay and may contain original research. Not to mention some likely copyright violations on the images used in the article. If some of this info is useful it could likely be merged to Bitcoin. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:37, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - this is WP:OR and can only ever be that —Мандичка YO 😜 04:02, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete an essay without any viable hopes of passing WP:GNG, I'm not seeing useful content to merge and it doesn't seem like it would make a good redirect. Winner 42 Talk to me!  04:28, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. I don't really see where this expands on the pre-existing article on Bitcoin. I'd say that it could possibly be merged, but it looks like Winner 42 has already taken a look at this and found nothing worthwhile. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No encyclopaedic topic here, just original research. If there was anything worth merging, or any references worth reusing, then I'd say "go for it" but if there isn't then there is no point agonising over it. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:06, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTESSAY. "Bitcoin network" might be notable, but this article is not and will never be the encyclopedic device to hold it.  野狼院ひさし  u/t/c 10:33, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There actually is an article on Bitcoin networks already which was previously split from the main article. Winner 42 Talk to me!  18:23, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the find. Now there is absolutely no redeeming factor to keep this one then.  野狼院ひさし  u/t/c 13:43, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, Essay-like and appears to have some Synthesis in work (several "seems to show" references). Crow  Caw  18:04, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too much of an essay. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks unsalvageable. Nwlaw63 (talk) 19:23, 8 June 2015 (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.