Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Provably fair algorithm: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
David Gerard (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Fix Linter errors. |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by 5 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
:({{Find sources AFD|title=Provably fair algorithm}})
Fails notability test -- insufficient independent reliable sources that are about this topic itself. Seems largely to be a promotion for Dragonchain; note that the Bloomberg "article" cited is actually a Dragonchain press release. Another cited source, "provably.com" seems to be a website devoted to promoting the idea of provably fair gambling. And so on. -- [[User:The Anome|The Anome]] ([[User talk:The Anome|talk]]) 10:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Line 9 ⟶ 14:
*'''Delete''' - this originated as a neologism in cryptocurrency gambling; no usage I could find outside crypto gambling - [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]] ([[User talk:David Gerard|talk]]) 11:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - As the author, I didn't think much about the notability, as I had encountered its concepts a few years ''before'' its use in cryptocurrency. I would remind people that "crypto" has its roots in ... "crypto," as in [https://www.google.com/books/edition/Theory_of_Cryptography/6g5nI71vgiIC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Provably+fair%22+-wikipedia&pg=PA246&printsec=frontcover this link] to a 2005 crypto book that covers "provably fair" in connection to the "[[zero-knowledge proof]]" that forms a foundation for certain cryptocurrency [[blockchain]]s, and has some relevancy for nearly all of them. In my ignorance 6 years ago, some of this wasn't known. The article's poor state now is due to a lack of competent editors, not due to any notoriety of the topic. Look at the [[ZKP]] article, read the History section, which starts out as, "Zero-knowledge proofs were first conceived in 1985 (...)" Provably fair is just a subset of the ZKP. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof#cite_note-26 This citation]. It appears the article needs to get an infusion of that sort of fundamental and less of the hodl community. And finally, [https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9570&context=penn_law_review scholarly research such as this] seems to be interested in virtually the same provably fair algorithms in the oversight of governments and their programming, like running a "provably accountable" visa lottery. [[User:Uruiamme|I like to saw logs!]] ([[User talk:Uruiamme|talk]]) 06:35, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
**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
<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>
|