Talk:Non-fungible token

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ST927s (article contribs).

Other blockchains to add

Been so long since I've edited Wiki that I'm out of touch.

In section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-fungible_token#Others one of the biggest NFT blockchains is missing: WAX. Source material can be found at https://on.wax.io/wax-io/ and the most common marketplace is atomichub.io with neftyblocks.com being the more robust choice for NFT creator tools.

97.120.212.15 (talk) 00:41, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be notable. Non-primary sources would be needed. Mewnst (talk) 01:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

A simple web search (https://www.google.com/search?q=biggest+NFT+blockchains) reveals: https://dappradar.com/nft, https://pixelplex.io/blog/top-ten-blockchains-for-nft-development/, https://beincrypto.com/nft-ecosystems-top-5-of-2021-according-to-beincrypto-staff/, https://www.creativebloq.com/features/nft-crypto-which-is-best, etc.

The article is also missing Matic, Binance Smart Chain and several others. Kinda reads like 2019. I guess you can't talk about WAX without mentioning it's parent chain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EOS.IO (though WAX was on ETH in the early days). In fact, this was the chain that Garbage Pail Kids chose (also Streetfighter, Weezer, Robotech, Funko, Hot Wheels etc, etc) for their releases. I guess if you don't spend any time in the NFT space or you're happy paying ETH gas fees then it could seem irrelevant but those names seem pretty relevant to me. No skin off my back. Probably better to keep the gems hidden anyway :-D ETH may be the biggest NFT chain but only because it's been around so long. Compared to the others though, it quite frankly sucks for NFTs. Here's hoping that ETH 2.0 fixes that.

97.120.212.15 (talk) 06:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Crypto blogs are most usually unreliable, fly-by-night publications. Something greater is needed. Mewnst (talk) 01:06, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Actually, this is just about adding a couple lines to the article. I think I can still handle that. I guess I don't need to write the article on the WAX blockchain since there isn't one for Flow either. I just want to be sure that whoever feels they need to custodian this article aren't going to immediately revert my changes. That's what turned me off from contributing anything more so many years ago.

97.120.212.15 (talk) 07:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

This page would be damn near unreadable if it became a coat rack for every "notable" NFT release. It still has some issues, but it was especially terrible 6 months ago with "first fried potato as a .SVG NFT" type nonsense flooding the page. No. Mewnst (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Not talking about every NFT release, I'm talking about the backbone of NFTs, the blockchains that they exist on. The continents as it were. That list of projects I posted was to establish relevance of the WAX blockchain. I had no intention of listing all of those. So far there's just one fairly adamant vote against rounding out the list from someone with a pretty light revision history here. Anyone else with a little more exposure to blockchains and NFT have a little more constructive input? In the meantime "Forbes WAX NFT" pulled up this if you are interested in reading: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2022/01/26/everything-you-want-to-know-about-nfts-but-are-embarrassed-to-ask-from-the-king-of-nfts/?sh=754f66db7315

If not, here are a few choice quotes from the article that oughta solidify the case:

"WAX is also the leading entertainment NFT network."

"Quigley points out that the power of his blockchain allows for this volume and is superior to other protocols, such as Ethereum, Solana and Polygon."

97.120.212.15 (talk) 17:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

That source is also unreliable per WP:FORBESCON. So, no. Mewnst (talk) 08:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Cool, let's remove reference 61 and 118 then. And obviously I'm being met with an unconstructive 'no' instead of positive collaboration. Nice to see wikipedia is still guarded by stodges. I'm sorry your own couple of edits got reversed or denied but please don't re-project that to the rest of the site. 97.120.131.149 (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Those two other Forbes sources are not Forbes "contributors," but are instead Forbes staff working under editorial oversight. Forbes does a terrible job of visually differentiating unreliable contributors and the better work hosted on their website, so the confusion is understandable. No harm in being laconic. Keep in mind competence is required to edit Wikipedia, and having standards isn't being an annoying stodge. I have no idea what reverts you're referring to, but talk pages are not a platform for interpersonal drama or whatever else you're trying to invent here. Mewnst (talk) 01:21, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mewnst is correct here. IP, you would have to provide sources of a much higher quality (think New York Times, Wall Street Journal) if you want to achieve consensus that the mention of this blockchain is warranted. JBchrch talk 04:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you sir for some guidance instead of blockades. 97.120.131.149 (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate the reference to competence which is why I'm reaching out for conversation and help. In doing so, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers 97.120.131.149 (talk) 19:23, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Things have changed quite a bit since I was editing over 10 years ago. NYT acknowledged a while ago that WAX exists and uses it in the same breath as ETH/OpenSea. Assuming Steven Kurutz is not a persona non grata on Wikipedia. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/14/style/teens-nft-art.html 97.120.131.149 (talk) 20:54, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Tell ya what, I have better things to do. So, I'll drop these 2 links here and anyone else can feel free to add or not add WAX as one of the top blockchains in the world. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-00053-8 https://www.yahoo.com/now/wax-rises-2-nft-sales-190800934.html. If Wikipedia is truly subjective then there should be little problem adding it. However a Google search of "is wikipedia subjective" is rather eye opening and confirms what I felt coming back. Comment if you feel the need to justify an argument but for your good riddance I'm closing this tab and won't see any witty rebuttal. Save your writing skills for making Wikipedia a better place. 97.120.131.149 (talk) 17:22, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The sources you brought up are interesting, and I'll give them consideration. However, we are all volunteers here and not paid to be your personal customer service. I invite you to ponder this when you'll inevitably see this as you load this page "one last time" to check whether anyone has responded to you. JBchrch talk 20:08, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Remove useless ve image here

Remove the ve image "pixel art" crap: this is hidden advertising, what is this image and why is it put into this entry on Wikipedia? Read above the paragraphs which NFT projects are relevant, this is useless here. Before, there was a Hashmask for example which is much more relevant to understand this content

Request for removal:

Some digital art NFTs, like these pixel art characters, are examples of generative art.

Change to: make a reference to a mentioned NFT project, e.g. Cryptokitties or the work form Beeple, etc.

Aethyx (talk) 12:46, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I think it does a good job at educating our readers on the type of art that is popular for NFTs. However, it would be nice perhaps for someone to make some art that doesn't reference an actual NFT project due to the well-founded promotional concerns. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 09:08, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps someone (with better art skills then me) could pull a Catgirl and make a Wikipe-tan image? casualdejekyll 14:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

 Note: I'm closing this request while discussion takes place, per template instructions. Seems that multiple people involved in the conversation can make an edit when they see fit. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:00, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposal to replace with CryptoPunks

File:Cryptopunks general.jpg I agree with Aethyx that we can probably find a more illustrative picture than this. How about the image used in the infobox at CryptoPunks? JBchrch talk 16:10, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Other uses section

The text now includes at the end the following:

In February 2022 a woman bought at auction a five-bedroom, three-and-half-bath house near Tampa Bay, Florida for 210 Ether, the equivalent of US$653,000 at the time of the sale. The sale transferred ownership of the house from the seller to a limited liability company; ownership of the LLC was then automatically transferred to the auction winner and the seller received the crypto payment in her digital wallet.[clarification needed][94]

It is totally unclear from either this text, or the 'Fortune' article cited, how this transaction amounted to trade in an NFT: all that apparently happened was that a person paid in cryptocurrency for a house that was owned by a company at the time of the transaction. What was the token in this instance? Sbishop (talk) 18:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I cut it out. My guess is that whoever put that in confused the purchase of digital real estate in virtual worlds as NFTs with the practice of using cryptocurrencies to purchase physical real estate. Mewnst (talk) 02:51, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Buying real estate as an NFT is not yet a widely accepted ofr common practice, first step; you would have to find a seller willing to accept crypto as a method of payment, Second step; keep in mind that it is common in some states to use a third party, like an escrow company to facilitate the transaction between Buyer and Seller, and a Title company to insure the title against any defects that can lead to loses or liabilities to the new owner, therefore the use of NFTs to purchase real estate is not yet a common practice. The technology used for NFTs known as blockchain is an excellent tool for the transfer of title between Buyers and Sellers, but the real estate industry is not quite ready to start mass addoption of this new technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Level23Media (talk • contribs) 04:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2022

Change "were being used to mine[clarification needed] user IP addresses" to "were being used to unknowingly gather users IP addresses."

Thanks! Article in the citations suggests malicious code can be inserted in to NFT marketplaces. Such as secret IP gathering. Peterrwerner (talk) 21:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Howdy! I changed the text to the following:

• In January 2022, it was reported that some NFTs were being exploited by sellers to unknowingly gather user IP addresses.

Is that good? Mewnst (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

This request seems to have been  Partly done without issue, so ill close it for now. If the original request opener has an issue with this phrasing, they can simply re-open the request. Aidan9382 _(talk) 17:43, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Misleading mention of unique identifiers, or lack thereof

The final sentence of the opening paragraph says - "Because each token is uniquely identifiable, NFTs differ from most cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, which are fungible". That first phrase is misleading, suggesting that it is the lack of unique identifiers that makes cryptocurrencies fungible, when it is actually the interchangeability of cryptocurrencies that makes them fungible. It would be best if the first phrase was simply dropped for now and the sentence changed to - "NFTs differ from most cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, which are fungible". I know this article needs a lot more work but I think that misleading statement in the opening paragraph shoud be corrected as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylornk (talk • contribs) 09:21, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Announcement (DO NOT TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY)

I screenshotted your bored ape NFT!!!!!!!! Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 07:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)Rugoconites_Tenuirugosus