Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skeincoin


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:45, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Skeincoin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet the general notability guidelines. Average, typical altcoin. Only claim to fame is using Skein over scrypt or SHA. Citation Needed &#x007C;  Talk  15:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, same reason I'd given in my PROD tag, doesn't meet WP:GNG. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:18, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I removed it only because of the Skein part, so I tried to look for sources but failed at doing so. Consider my vote more speedy. Citation Needed  &#x007C;  Talk  15:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  15:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete Subject is utterly non-noteworthy, and is promotional (WP:G11); tried and failed to find any reliable sources (WP:RS) with any information. --Agyle (talk) 18:46, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Spam at best. VinceSamios (talk) 19:59, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * disagree The main editor did not know what criterias where of essence. Made the first step in citation and relevance. Please reconsider I´m open for changes Methmatician (talk • contribs) 20:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Until massive improvement is seen, I sadly cannot. Citation Needed  &#x007C;  Talk  21:31, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The references you're adding will not change my speedy delete vote. While I appreciate your effort, the references do not meet Wikipedian's requirement for reliable sources. (See WP:RS). As far as I could find, there simply aren't any reliable sources that mention Skeincoin. Simply finding some website that says something is not acceptable; information needs to come from a reputable source, like the New York Times, or the Journal of International Economics. While it is sometimes acceptable to reference a subject's website (i.e. skeincoin.org) directly, there are limitations to such references, and they do not establish the notability (see WP:N) of the topic, which is one of the fundamental problems with this article. ––Agyle (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
 * True. My bad, thought that I could improve this but due to lack of articles I can't. Please change my vote to delete.--Methmatician (talk) 10:02, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Why delete? I don't agree with deletion. The coin exists and there should be a wikipedia article about it. References from popular media is just a matter of time. --matuhin86 (talk) 10:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * "It exists" isn't sufficient to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. See WP:NOTDIR: "Wikipedia is not a directory of everything in the universe that exists or has existed." As for speculation about meeting the notability requirements in the future, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. You may disagree with these principles, but at this time they're the ones that are in effect. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:06, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete It is too early for this, Methmatician... --Surfer43_¿qué pasa? 02:47, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOTPROMOTION, no encyclopedic content, just some facts and no significant coverage. ///Euro Car  GT  21:28, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of reliable sources establishing notability of this bitcoin. --TeaDrinker (talk) 22:23, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - Possibly the worst one yet in terms of WP:GNG sources, google yields nothing. Proposing WP:SNOWBALL. I strongly feel that going the full AfD route with these cryptocoin-of-the-moment ads, invariably ending in deletion, is a complete waste of everyone's time. How complicated would it be to run all new articles past an admin, and if they clearly have no decent sources, dump them e.g. in the Article Incubator instead of the main namespace with a single mouse click? This would effectively kill the publicity motive for creating articles on topics that aren't notable. Smite-Meister (talk) 16:18, 16 January 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.