Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Steven Wright: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Craig Steven Wright: Keep (for now)
No edit summary
Line 12: Line 12:
*'''Redirect''' to [[Satoshi_Nakamoto#Craig_Steven_Wright]] [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 11:19, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
*'''Redirect''' to [[Satoshi_Nakamoto#Craig_Steven_Wright]] [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 11:19, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' for now - it's a developing story, so give it a day or two to accumulate sources. Might blow over and stay [[WP:1E]], but there seems to be some information beyond Bitcoin already. --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 13:08, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' for now - it's a developing story, so give it a day or two to accumulate sources. Might blow over and stay [[WP:1E]], but there seems to be some information beyond Bitcoin already. --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 13:08, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
*'''Strong Keep''' for the autor of BiCoin. [[User:Vitor Mazuco|<font color="#FF2400">Vitor</font> <font color="#000080">Mazuco</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Vitor Mazuco|Talk!]]</sup> 13:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:38, 9 December 2015

Craig Steven Wright (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I removed a speedy deletion tag from this bio because a clear claim of notability had been made and backed up by a reliable source. However, the Wired article is the only source, and it makes sweeping claims amid a great deal of surmise and conjecture, perhaps too much to meet WP:BLP requirements for such a dramatic assertion. I've cut the article back to the bare bones of Wired's assertion. Acroterion (talk) 04:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The independent Gizmodo ref helps considerably: my main concern rested on the single source. As you say, let's see how this plays out. I would expect more news shortly if both of those publications were pursuing the story independently. Acroterion (talk) 04:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]