Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guldencoin


 * 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--Ymblanter (talk) 07:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Guldencoin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I really am not seeing that this is notable yet. The editor has created two other similar articles with the same problems. All three articles are extremely promotional, unsourced, and read like PR/conflict of interest copy promoting these very new digital currencies. At best it seems far too soon. Mabalu (talk) 01:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * delete. no evidence of notability. -No.Altenmann >t 05:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  01:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete: No evidence found to indicate that this altcoin has attained notability. AllyD (talk) 08:14, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: See the article creator's comments on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Guldencoin. AllyD (talk) 10:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete This entry has been covered are adequately covered in Cryptocurrency, if this entry was of merit it would be listed there.--Lfrankbalm (talk) 18:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfrankbalm (talk • contribs)
 * Delete Per Lfrankbalm above. --Jersey92 (talk) 15:50, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:GNG - Lack of reliable secondary sources in the article. No indication why the subject is notable. - Taketa (talk) 09:21, 30 October 2014 (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.