From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The lack of commercial deployments[edit]

I was going to add the following however I note that it was written 10 months ago. Include or not? The lack of commercial deployments for blockchains has been attributed to their expense, complexity and inefficient energy use.[1]


  1. ^ Saifedean Ammous (4 February 2016). "Blockchain Won't Make Banks Any Nimbler". American Banker. SourceMedia. Retrieved 8 December 2016.

Unreadable to the uninitiated[edit]

For someone uninformed about the general subject matter who, say, simply wants to understand what blockchains are sufficiently to comprehend the text in which they first saw it used, this article is useless. It gives no actual explanation of what they actually are, and only confuses further by using a plethora of what some might call additional technical mumbo jumbo. There's plenty of room for that stuff, but the introduction should at least in part be used to give context to the topic, explain the very basics and give a small number of tangible, comprehensible facts which help readers place blockchains in a sort of mental category, before the article delves into rattling off all the theoretical specifications, history and various uses of blockchains.

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2019[edit]

Please add the below paragraph to the "Uses" section in the Blockchain Wikipedia page:

Blockchain may significantly increase interconnectivity, security, and data access across the manufacturing shop floor. A comprehensive study conducted by [1] has clarified these potential impacts and a three-layer blockchain architecture was proposed for smart manufacturing applications. It is believed that Blockchain technology would enhance automatic machine learning in manufacturing applications and create an open society for data share and networking.

[1] Lee, Jay, Moslem Azamfar, and Jaskaran Singh. "A blockchain enabled Cyber-Physical System architecture for Industry 4.0 manufacturing systems." Manufacturing Letters 20 (2019): 34-39. Cyrus Azamfar (talk) 23:07, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Not done and since you made the edit yourself, eraser Undone per the edit summary. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:00, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
Reverted as blatant WP:CRYSTAL - "may", "could", "in future" are all words meaning "doesn't", because the blockchain proponents in question couldn't find enough support for "does" - David Gerard (talk) 11:25, 2 November 2019 (UTC)


David Gerard I would suggest to blank this Blockchain#Manufacturing section entirely per WP:CRYSTALBALL. Last thing we need is this article to turn into the 'blockchain solves this' without actual evidence of a solution. If there are actual notable projects that are doing something (regardless if we think it will work) we can include such as the Blockchain#Supply_chain section, but for sections that are just theory we should apply a more WP:MEDRS-like policy to require secondary sources concepts that 'blockchain will solve this' just as a 'whatever quack theory will cure this'Jtbobwaysf (talk) 22:50, 2 November 2019 (UTC)


I blanked and put it here per WP:PRESERVE. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:09, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Blockchain is hypothesised to provide tamper-resistant transparent information about different stages of the product life cycle [1] which helps in tracing the materials. Blockchain may enhance security and privacy of manufacturing systems [2] and by using smart contracts, different tasks could be executed in an autonomous and decentralized way. It is speculated that Blockchain significantly contribute to interconnectivity, security, and data access across the manufacturing shop floor. A comprehensive study[3] has clarified these potential impacts and a three-layer blockchain architecture was proposed for smart manufacturing applications.


  1. ^ Saberi, Sara; Kouhizadeh, Mahtab; Sarkis, Joseph; Shen, Lejia (17 October 2018). "Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management". International Journal of Production Research. 57 (7): 2117–2135. doi:10.1080/00207543.2018.1533261.
  2. ^ Khan, Minhaj Ahmad; Salah, Khaled (May 2018). "IoT security: Review, blockchain solutions, and open challenges". Future Generation Computer Systems. 82: 395–411. doi:10.1016/j.future.2017.11.022.
  3. ^ Lee, Jay; Azamfar, Moslem; Singh, Jaskaran (April 2019). "A blockchain enabled Cyber-Physical System architecture for Industry 4.0 manufacturing systems". Manufacturing Letters. 20: 34–39. doi:10.1016/j.mfglet.2019.05.003.

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2019[edit]

"Change The block time for Ethereum is set to between 14 and 15 seconds, while for bitcoin it is 10 minutes. to The block time for Ethereum is set to between 14 and 15 seconds, while for bitcoin the block creation rate with 10 minutes being the average.[1][2]

Please add clarification on the time of generation of the block. In the version I proposed, it is indicated that the average block time is 10 minutes. In the current version there is a statement that 10 minutes are constant. However, 10 minutes is the average time, so clarification is needed. I also provided links to sources. Thanks! 7ilver (talk) 14:22, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Done. The text in question in the article is uncited so I didnt expand it. We dont use as a WP:RS on these crypto articles. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 20:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ "Why do i have to wait 10 minutes". Retrieved 2019-11-10.
  2. ^ "Total network hashing rate". Retrieved 2019-11-10.

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2019[edit]

I have noticed that the area of "Open Science" is not mentioned in the third chapter, "Uses." This could be supplemented since numerous projects got started here for several years. For example, in the section "3.6 Other uses.”

I suggest to expand the following paragraph with one sentence:

"[...] The use of blockchain in libraries is being studied with a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services.[84] The open science movement also uses blockchains to improve research collaborations between scientists and even citizens (citizen science).[1]"

Concerning "Proof of Existence", I suggest mentioning one or two websites that offer this service free of charge and without commercial thoughts. Example 1: OriginStamp ( Example 2: OpenTimestamps (

What do you think of these suggestions? Ceifers (talk) 18:20, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Frontiers is a publisher of predatory open access journals. Frontiers in Blockchain is not something I'd call a trustworthy RS. Apart from that, the claim is WP:CRYSTAL - it's a possible future use, not something it's actually being used for in production - David Gerard (talk) 18:24, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Note: Marking this as Not done, per the above. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:15, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. There was a second request regarding the examples of existing proof-of-existence services. In this article, several possible scenarios are described whose application is still in the stars (similar to open science). Therefore, I thought that this topic would fit as well. Ceifers (talk) 16:50, 25 November 2019 (UTC)


  1. ^ Leible, Stephan; Schlager, Steffen; Schubotz, Moritz; Gipp, Bela (2019). "A Review on Blockchain Technology and Blockchain Projects Fostering Open Science". Frontiers in Blockchain. 2: 1–28. doi:10.3389/fbloc.2019.00016.

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2019[edit]

Request that the following Use Case (see text below) be added under Use Cases for Supply Chain ->

Chainyard and IBM have launched a new blockchain network designed to improve supplier qualification, validation, onboarding and life cycle information management. The network is called Trust Your Supplier and includes global brands of Anheuser-Busch InBev, Cisco, GlaxoSmithKline, Lenovo, Nokia, Schneider Electric, GlaxoSmithKline and Vodafone as founding participants. IAKChainyard (talk) 03:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

It doesn't seem this has gotten much attention outside of press releases yet. In my opinion this would need significant attention and impact to warrant inclusion. – Thjarkur (talk) 09:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
@Thjarkur: Do you think the text can be anchored with this [1]? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 13:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Possibly, we already mention IBM was doing some preliminary blockchain work under that section, this is probably a continuation of that. Will reopen this request. – Thjarkur (talk) 11:14, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 Not done for now: We generally like to use independent reliable sources as references. The ZDNet article and a similar ComputerWorld article are barely-rewritten versions of IBM press releases. If there is subsequent, truly independent reporting on this usage, then it may become appropriate for inclusion. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2020 - Suggested major fixes to the entry for "Blockchain"[edit]

As per the correct entry for Merkle Trees on Wikipedia, "blockchain" is a generic term for a category of data structures that were created by Ralph Merkle. Most of this page is obviously a very particular viewpoint and not an objective definition, history or description of blockchain. This article is therefore seriously flawed and tendentious. Certainly, the following should be removed in its entirety:

--begin citation-- Blockchain was invented by a person (or group of people) using the name Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008 to serve as the public transaction ledger of the cryptocurrency bitcoin.[1] The identity of Satoshi Nakamoto is unknown. The invention of the blockchain for bitcoin made it the first digital currency to solve the double-spending problem without the need of a trusted authority or central server. The bitcoin design has inspired other applications,[1][3] and blockchains that are readable by the public are widely used by cryptocurrencies. Blockchain is considered a type of payment rail.[9] Private blockchains have been proposed for business use. Sources such as Computerworld called the marketing of such blockchains without a proper security model "snake oil".[10] --end citation--

At a minimum, the first sentence is entirely wrong and should be removed: --begin citation-- Blockchain was invented by a person (or group of people) using the name Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008 to serve as the public transaction ledger of the cryptocurrency bitcoin.[1] --end citation--

Any further citation of "Satoshi Nakamoto" as an "inventor" or anything but an implementer of a type of blockchain should be removed. This article should be largely derived from the Wikipedia entry for Merkle Tree and refer to Bitcoin and Nakamoto, at most, with such an entry as follows: --begin citation-- The initial Bitcoin implementation of Merkle trees by Satoshi Nakamoto applies the compression step of the hash function to an excessive degree, which is mitigated by using Fast Merkle Trees.[10] --end citation-- Evodas (talk) 01:47, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

  • Disagree - the claims in the current wording of the article are based on citations of reliable sources. As opposed to that, the above proposal is not based on citations of reliable sources. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 12:37, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Disagree per Ladislav's comments. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. As the objections above demonstrate, this is not an uncontroversial request. Edit Requests are specifically for uncontroversial changes. Please create a separate discussion to demonstrate a WP:CONSENSUS exists for making this change. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:13, 16 January 2020 (UTC)