Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crypto Valley (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to Zug. Unanimous agreement that this shouldn't exist as a stand alone article, but no clear consensus on whether it should be deleted outright, merged, or redirected. Going with redirect as a reasonable middle ground. Two people suggested protecting the title, but I don't see any consensus on that, so I'll skip the protection for now. If that turns out to be an issue, it can always be protected later. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Crypto Valley
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per the first AfD: Articles for deletion/Crypto Valley. There's a current proposal to merge this to Zug, but the term is not sufficiently well established. For example, there's also "Crypto Valley of Asia" (also employed by various cryptocurrency publications). K.e.coffman (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment User:K.e.coffman there's already an open merge discussion underway (with currently one supporter) at Talk:Zug . I'm tempted to just merge and be done, but will leave for others to comment now, but this looks like a speedy merge or snow merge (or whatever). Widefox ; talk 00:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think there's a point in merging this to Zug as it would retain a redirect. The term is too obscure, hence this AfD proposal. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * A judgement call, but a redirect is surmountable with WP:CHEAP, WP:RfD, and semi protection available. Seems like a useful alt-title redirect as the term isn't slang and is mentioned in multiple RS. Widefox ; talk 03:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Per Talk:Zug "It's not slang, is used in multiple RS, has 1/4M Ghits ("crypto valley") including gold standard sources like BBC,  BBC, and  Business Insider. We have many other precedents List of technology centers. It is a valid link used in one three articles and a draft. A redirect to the section of Zug about a non-notable subtopic seems more useful than search and is WP:CHEAP"  Widefox ; talk 17:16, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ("Crypto Valley of Asia" gets 0.012MGhits, so an order of magnitude less than this, which of course is irrelevant here per WP:OTHERSTUFF. ) Widefox ; talk 23:04, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 05:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Switzerland-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 05:13, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete or redirect to Zug, it's a local promotional slogan at best - David Gerard (talk) 10:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete rather than redirect. It's an obscure nickname and unlikely search term. Also, deletion would enable the page to be salted, which I recommend to avoid more of these time-wasting discussions in the event of another recreation. buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 13:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge I recall one section was dedicated to this on the zug article. As David says, this is really an edge case. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 18:10, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect (Strong) term is good enough for two BBC articles, Business Insider and 1/4M Ghits but not good enough for a redirect? Really?! We follow sources not ignore them and assist readers finding content with redirects. This AfD is understandable given the last one (note that one delete !vote Ilyina Olya Yakovna is now a blocked sock which wasn't recognised at the time) and the usual whack a mole of crypto, but trying to force a delete when there's a merge underway and WP:BEFORE is questionable. Usage in sources isn't that obscure and we can fix that now per WP:ATD-M WP:POVFORK. Widefox ; talk 13:07, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge to Zug. Given the non-insignificant coverage in reliable sources about the term and how it's a hub for crypto, the content should be merged into the city page's economy section. Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:15, 23 January 2019 (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.

I created the page crypto valley. I did so because I was shocked it didn't exist. I can't understand any of the wiki-lingo above, and do not have the time or energy to argue. I just want to say merging crypto-valley with zug has about as much sense and substance as merging silicon valley with whatever is the nearest town, or cryptocurrency with currency, or capitalism with early american history. Crypto valley is not a slang term, there are dozens of cryptocurrencies, including many of the biggest names that have their headquarters there and refer to it, there's an multi-million dollar cooperative organisation that has the word in its title that organises conferences (also using that 'slang' term) that attract thousands of people from around the world. They don't come to learn about or even see Zug. The embracing of crypto-friendly legislation by the VILLAGE of zug has attracted multi-million dollar companies that have bigger budgets than the village. The cultural, political, legal, traditional and economic changes to Zug related to it becoming the centre of crypto valley are so divorced from those found in the article on Zug, only a wikipedia editor who lives exclusively in some wikipedia-rulebook universe with no practical grounding in the real world would support crypto valley existing (or even not existing) as a subheading in Zug. I have no interest in editing Wikipedia if my significant work is deleted by people who have no knowledge or interest in the subject, but who's only claim to fame is that they know the rulebook and the lingo and they spend half their life on wikipedia, feeling like powerful knowledge snobs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aniish72 (talk • contribs) 09:21, 3 March 2019 (UTC)