Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nxt (3rd 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  19:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

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

BaconBach wrote on Talk:Nxt: It's not a notable project (WP:N) and there are literally no references. This does not pass WP:SIGCOV — Preceding unsigned comment added by BaconBach (talk • contribs) 14:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

This is a proxy nomination for BaconBach. I have no opinion. MER-C 15:07, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - I too see no RS coverage, and only mentions in bottom-of-the-barrel crypto blogs - David Gerard (talk) 11:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Balkywrest (talk) 23:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per David. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 00:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. And not a moment too soon. -The Gnome (talk) 13:10, 21 November 2018 (UTC) See below for changed !vote. -The Gnome (talk) 06:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The book notes: "Nxt, pronounced 'Next,' is a 'Crypto 2.0' (i.e., next-generation) coin that is among the most powerful of those available. It has one of the most active developer communities and its 2.0 features are among the most commonly used. Nxt features a decentralized marketplace for digital goods, a digital 'token' or asset exchange, a monetary system that allows the easy creation of currencies secured on the Nxt blockchain, a messaging system, and an alias system. It is also the flagship coin in the SuperNET system, which combines several blockchains and allows them to communicate. These features came out over time since the currency's 2013 release and new features are constantly added. Like Bitcoin's Satoshi Nakamoto, Nxt's creator chose to remain anonymous and went by the name BCNext before disappearing in a fashion similar to Nakamoto. Although the Nxt community is one of the coin's strongest assets, it has also proven to be one of its biggest liabilites as well. Early on in its history, the community split for reasons that still aren't clear. This split led to the creation of two message boards, causing confusion for newcomers that persists to this day. There have also been a few scams involving members or former members of the community that further hurt the coin's reputation. Nxt has also been subject to a few Bitcoin-style hacks. Although all these have had to do with exchange security or user error more than the security of the coin itself, Nxt is stored entirely online—and the lack of easily stored offline wallets is sometimes blamed for the issue. In 2014, one of Nxt's biggest exchanges, Bter, lost 50 million NXT. The community considered a hard fork to reverse the effects of the hack but decided this wouldn't be fair to people who made legitimate transactions during the time between the hack and the hard fork. It was also thought this would set a bad precedent in the community. [Four more paragraphs.]"  The book notes: "12.7.5 Nxt Nxt uses a different code base than Bitcoin, written from scratch. Nxt also creates its own blockchain, secured using a 100% proof-of-stake system. The main applications of Nxt are a decentralized exchange, voting system, messaging, and DNS. Addresses use elliptic curve public key cryptography24. Transactions, and other mes- sages, are registered in the blockchain. Nxt blockchain uses a proof-of-stake algorithm (14.2.1). Nxt assumes that all clients in the network run a full node. Addresses where at least one incoming transaction has been confirmed by 1440 blocks are called unlocked addresses or active accounts. These addresses are eligible to generate the next proof-of- stake block (Nxt wiki, 2014b). The native currency of Nxt is NXT, with an initial supply of 1 billion NXTs (Nxt wiki, 2014a). Nxt blocks have a field called the generation signature. Active accounts sign the generation signature with their private key and then hash the signature. If the resulting hash is lower than the target, then the active account can generate the next block, obtaining all the fees. Creating blocks is called forging blocks, in contrast with Bitcoin's mining, which requires computational power. The target for every active account is weighted by the amount of funds in that address (thus the proof-of-stake) and increases (doubles) every second until a node in the network forges the next block. This network target is tuned so that new blocks are forged on average every 60 seconds. [Four more paragraphs]"  The book notes: "NXT: Using Proof-of-Stake for Transaction Consensus Unlike bitcoin's consensus through mining, NXT (http://nxt.org) uses proof-of-stake to reach a transaction consensus. Additionally, NXT is one of the very few crypto-currencies that has no mining process — all coins were distributed during the launch of this altcoin. Having a steady supply of coins, available at any given time, created a new ecosystem in the world of crypto-currency. What makes NXT truly interesting is the fact that any user can create their own crypto-currency within the NXT ecosystem. All newly created coins are backed by NXT currency and can be distributed in a variety of ways. In more recent times, NXT has gradually introduced new features such as smart contracts, an arbitary messaging service, and a proper decentralized peer-to-peer exchange platform called MultiGateWay."  The book notes: "NXT NXT (pronounced 'Next') is a 'pure' proof-of-stake alt coin, in that it does not use proof-of-work mining. NXT is a from-scratch implementation of a cryptocurrency, not a fork of bitcoin or any other alt coins. NXT implements many advanced features, including a name registry (similar to Namecoin), a decentralized asset exchange (similar to Colored Coins), integrated decentralized and secure messaging (similar to Bitmessage), and stake delegation (to delegate proof-of-stake to others). NXT adherents call it a 'next-generation' or 2.0 cryptocurrency.<li>Block generation: 1 minute</li><li>Total currency: No limit</li><li>Consensus algorithm: Proof-of-stake</li><li>Market capitalization: $30 million in mid-2014</li></ul>"</li> <li> The book notes: "After the token sale of Mastercoin, NXT started its ICO in September 2013. NXT is the first cryptocurrency that uses purely Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism, and it has a static total supply of 1 billion coins. In the ICO, it raised 21 bitcoins that were worth roughly USD17,000. As of September 2, 2017, the price of NXT was around USD0.12, making it the most profitable investment cryptocurrency with a return on investment (ROI) of over 669 times."</li> <li> The article notes: "For example, NxT, NEM and SuperNET have distributed all coins at the time when the currency was released, implying a zero-growth rate. ... Only the prices of Ethereum, NameCoin, NxT and SuperNET are found to be affected by the BitCoin price. Note that only Ethereum and NameCoin are based on the same PoW transaction validation mechanism as BitCoin. NxT applies the PoS mechanism, while SuperNET is a basket of alternative virtual currencies. In terms of the total coin supply, only NameCoin, NxT and SuperNET apply the maximum limit to the coin supply (as BitCoin does) whereas Ethereum has an unlimited coin supply (Table 3)."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Nxt to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 17:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * Your refbombing is mostly passing mentions at best. Antonopoulos' explicitly promotional work on Bitcoin should not be treated as evidence of notability, same reason we don't treat crypto blogs as evidence of notability - David Gerard (talk) 10:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The Skyhorse Publishing-published The Bitcoin Guidebook book by Ian DeMartino provides eight paragraphs of coverage about Nxt. The John Wiley & Sons-published Understanding Bitcoin book by Pedro Franco provides seven paragraphs of coverage about Nxt. These two sources by themselves are sufficient to establish notability per Notability.  These two sources are not "passing mentions" or "crypto blogs".  Andreas M. Antonopoulos' book Mastering Bitcoin was published by the reputable publisher O'Reilly Media. According to https://books.google.com/books?id=IXmrBQAAQBAJ&pg=PR4, the book's editors were Mike Loukides and Allyson MacDonald, the book's production editor was Melanie Yarbrough, the book's copyeditor was Kim Cofer, and the book's proofreader was Carla Thornton. The content about Nxt is neutrally written. This book was published by a reputable publisher and had plenty of editorial oversight. I do not consider the book to be an "explicitly promotional work on Bitcoin" (please provide evidence that it is promotional), though even if the source is discounted, the books by Ian DeMartino and Pedro Franco are sufficient by themselves to establish notability.  Cunard (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * David Gerard, we're arguing about extant sources and Cunard identified a bunch of them. That's what we're supposed to do in such discussions! It's not "refbombing" by any stretch of the term. The essay on reference overkill is about something else, i.e. about cluttering up the text of existing articles with unnecessary, repetitive, or irrelevant citations. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 21:06, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: To discuss Cunard's sources.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:44, 21 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete No reliable sources found. This had been deleted 3 times in previous AFDS some of which were created with different names, i think once deleted it should be SALTED. PlotHelpful (talk) 18:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No reliable sources found. – significant coverage about Nxt in multiple book sources have been presented. This had been deleted 3 times in previous AFDS some of which were created with different names, i think once deleted it should be SALTED – this is not a policy-based reason for deletion. PlotHelpful has 66 edits in total. PlotHelpful made their first edits in January 2017 and made no further edits until 22 November 2018.  Cunard (talk) 09:35, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No, looks a perfectly reasonable and policy-based opinion to me - David Gerard (talk) 10:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * PlotHelpful's comment says "No reliable sources found" but does not explain why these two are not reliable sources:<ol><li>The Bitcoin Guidebook book by Ian DeMartino and published by the Skyhorse Publishing which provides eight paragraphs of coverage about Nxt.</li><li>The Understanding Bitcoin book by Pedro Franco and published by the John Wiley & Sons which provides seven paragraphs of coverage about Nxt.</li></ol>Cunard (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment: The article, as it now stands, contains precisely zero references. (There is a section it it, titled "References," which stands empty of content.) And that's almost two weeks after the article has been nominated for deletion. It would be great to see some or all of the sources Cunard dug up worked into the article and then decide if it's worth staying up. Cheers. -The Gnome (talk) 21:06, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have added all of the sources I presented here to the article except for the contested Andreas M. Antonopoulos source. Cunard (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete I do not see the brief mentions in articles about bitcoin as substantial enough for this to be notable or beyond a run-of-the-mill cryptocurrency website. Reywas92Talk 05:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I cannot in all honesty reject the evidence of notability in the sources provided by Cunard. I notice that there has been no attempt to refute them but only blanket dismissals, with the accusation of "refbombing" to boot, which is absurd given that looking for references (and as many as possible) in an AfD debate is precisely what we're supposed to do. No matter how one feels about cryptocurrencies, this article now has the prerequisites to stay up. -The Gnome (talk) 06:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing the sources and reconsidering your position, . I greatly appreciate it. Cunard (talk) 07:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

<ul><li>In addition to the 15 paragraphs of coverage in the Skyhorse Publishing and John Wiley & Sons books (among other sources), here are more sources about the subject: <ul> <li></li> <li> Here is information about the report: "ESMA has been monitoring and analysing virtual currency investment over the last 6 months, to understand developments in the market, potential benefits or risks for investors, market integrity or financial stability, and to support the functioning of the EU single market. ESMA’s analysis is set out in this paper. ESMA is seeking to share its analysis in order to promote wider understanding of innovative market developments, and invites market participants and other stakeholders to submit feedback and any additional information on the following topics: ..." The report notes: "With NXT, another VC, every user can be assigned the role to validate or “forge” NXT. One difference between bitcoin and NXT is that all NXTs exist already, as opposed to bitcoins of which around 2/3 of the final amount of bitcoin exists today. Users of NXT can earn NXT by forging. Forging fulfils essentially the same role for NXT as mining does for bitcoins, i.e. validating a set of transactions, only that rewards are not new NXT but the transaction fees contained in each block. Also, the process is different in the sense that the competitive set-up of validating bitcoin transactions requires a lot more computing power than the allocative set-up of validating NXT transactions. The processing of a block takes 1-1.5 minutes and the recommended confirmation time is 10 blocks, i.e. 10- 15 minutes. ... 975 shares and other assets have been created and transacted so far via Colored Coin and NXT. Since the start of NXTs asset exchange in May 2014 around 50 new assets have been created each month. ... The benefit of cost and speed equally holds for issuers in terms of listing an asset on an asset exchange. In the case of the NXT asset exchange, a listing currently costs 1000 NXT (currently around 10 Euro) one-off plus transaction costs when sending rewards to investors."</li></ul> That the peer-reviewed academic journal Ledger (a journal published by the University of Pittsburgh's D-Scribe Digital Publishing that is dedicated to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology research) covered Nxt's forging algorithm in an extensive article and that the EU regulatory agency European Securities and Markets Authority covered Nxt in a report further establishes it is notable. Here are more sources: <ol> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>Cunard (talk) 07:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * Keep per Cunard's sources. I've been keeping an eye on this AFD. The two longest book sources above are probably okay for notability, though not as strong as the coverage primarily dedicated to Nxt. I was aware of the ESMA report since it's mentioned in the article. Just those might not be good enough but combined with the newest ones posted it is. Ranking from best to worst: Ledger, Reuters/Bloomberg, The Register, Finance Magnates ("formerly Forex Magnates" Did they change their name because of cryptocurrency?), then VentureBeat which is labelled as a "guest" post (would be better than FM if it wasn't). Morgan Ginsberg (talk) 06:18, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Is VB "guest" another word for "advertorial blog"? - David Gerard (talk) 10:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * KeepThe Ledger article, Reuters quotes and two books above meet the requirements of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the subject, notwithstanding that some of the others are obvious trash.AlasdairEdits (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.