Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Provably fair algorithm: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Fix Linter errors. |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
===[[:Provably fair algorithm]]===▼
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''delete'''. '''[[User:Seddon|Seddon]]''' <sup>[[User talk:Seddon|talk]]</sup> 20:34, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
▲===[[:Provably fair algorithm]]===
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
:{{la|1=Provably fair algorithm}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Provably fair algorithm|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 August 31#{{anchorencode:Provably fair algorithm}}|View log]]</noinclude>)
Line 11 ⟶ 16:
**At the moment it's a [[WP:TNT]]. I note also that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Provably_fair_algorithm&oldid=655297560 as started by you, it was cited to a single bitcoin site] - rather than being a high-quality article wrecked by bad editors as you posit, there's no evidence that this article was ever of acceptable quality in the past six years. This strongly suggests there is no reasonable prospect of organic improvement. If you could rebuild the hypothetical good article you posit using the claimed good and non-crypto-blog/non-press-release sources, that would be a start - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] ([[User talk:David Gerard|talk]]) 10:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Eddie891|Eddie891]] <small>''<sup> [[User talk:Eddie891|Talk]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Eddie891|Work]]</sub>'' </small> 11:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:XfD relist --></div>
* '''Delete'''. After looking at the history I can only agree with what [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] said in his reply to [[User:Uruiamme|I like to saw logs!]]. [[User:Athel cb|Athel cb]] ([[User talk:Athel cb|talk]]) 12:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Simply put, looking at sources in the article and elsewhere, this does not meet the [[WP:GNG]] or any other notability guideline I can think of - coverage is either non-independent, insignificant, or unreliable. [[User:Ganesha811|Ganesha811]] ([[User talk:Ganesha811|talk]]) 13:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:''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 [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||