Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Upfiring


 * 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. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 09:46, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Upfiring

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Cryptocurrency that's not notable. Їис́єӏ (talk) 00:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete: fails WP:NPRODUCT, there seem to be a load of these at AFC as well.   SITH   (talk)   15:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH  scope_creep Talk  15:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and the above. bd2412  T 16:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep If you do not like the page, just don't look at it. There is many of other pages at another part of the Wikipedia. ﷴﷺﷴﷺﷴﷺ (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Not a policy-based reason - David Gerard (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability under any rule, no RSes - David Gerard (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep! Passes WP:RS relative for the subject's industry. User:arjay92 (talk) 07:07, 30 March 2019 (UTC) — Arjay92 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * You need to supply sourcing evidence that passes WP:RS on this matter. Crypto blogs are not accepted now that there's considerable mainstream coverage of crypto - David Gerard (talk) 07:32, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep This is one of the most popular Ethereum-based DApps, and would be considered notable especially relative to the cryptocurrency space. This passes WP:RS, saying a cryptocurrency should only be covered on Wikipedia if it gets mainstream media coverage (typically reserved only for the top 10 cryptocurrencies or so) and that all crypto-focused sites are irrelevant is not appropriate. We should be focused on adding information about cryptocurrencies to Wikipedia, not removing it. 2601:88:280:2C45:8196:B21F:BF25:B957 (talk) 05:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC) — 2601:88:280:2C45:8196:B21F:BF25:B957 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Article contains literally 0 RSes at this moment - David Gerard (talk) 06:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and numerous reasons above. --mikeu talk 06:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)e
 * Delete Current sourcing is a complete cryptocurrency in-universe circle-jerk (pardon my Klatchian) - this is exactly what the CS notability guidelines single out as insufficient for demonstrating general notability. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Just of the 300+ cryptocoin articles that have gone before and been deleted, and the reason NCORP came about. Fails WP:NCORP, WP:CORPDEPTH, WP:ORGIND and WP:ORGCRIT.  scope_creep Talk  23:45, 4 April 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.