Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decimal (cryptocurrency)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decimal (cryptocurrency)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This was tagged as WP:CSD#G11, which I am uncertain about (the article has citations, at least claims notability, and has existed in mainspace since December 11). Nonetheless, it is not a particularly great article.

Almost all of the citations are to self-published sources. The sources that aren't self-published are questionable; being listed on CoinMarketCap is of dubious notability, for example, as there are tens of thousands of tokens, coins and chains listed there. Others, like the citations to cosmos.network, have nothing to do with Decimal. I have been unable to find any reliable sources talking about this company. jp×g 08:40, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cryptocurrency-related deletion discussions. jp×g 08:41, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. At the risk of arguing with someone who otherwise largely agrees with my opinion on the article... having citations, claiming notability, and existing for a few weeks doesn't excuse an article from being deleted under G11. A7 requires a claim to significance, while G11 only cares about how promotional the article is, and it's very clear that this SPA-authored article is promotional. (It was worse before I removed a large unencyclopedic "features and functions" list.) In any case, the citations are indeed garbage and I located no significant reliable coverage outside of that. I don't speak Russian so can't search for sources in Russian, but on the other hand, frankly I wouldn't trust a Russian source on cryptocurrency as far as I could throw it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Best I can find are conversion calculators for the currency. No coverage in any sort of RS. Oaktree b (talk) 14:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above and my review of the sources in the article and a mild additional search. Skynxnex (talk) 16:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per PMC. I'll be honest, if I'd came across the article in its original state I'd probably have processed the G11. firefly ( t · c ) 17:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:G11 concerns aside, I conducted an online search and I found that the article subject lacks significant coverage from multiple independent reliable sources (see WP:NCRYPTO w.r.t crypto-specific websites). As such, the article should be deleted for its subject lacking notability. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:13, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.