Bitcoin Forum

Satoshi Nakamoto currently has a page on Wikipedia, however the page has been marked for deletion. The votes to delete the page outnumber the votes to keep it.

Please go to the following page and add a "Strong Keep" entry to the ongoing debate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Satoshi_Nakamoto

They are suggesting redirecting the page to the Bitcoin page. This is actually a good idea, as pretty much no-one knows if that is his real name, who he is, where is from, or anything. Wikipedia is supposed to be filled with facts, not speculation and random quotes from a person who may or may not exist.

Nonetheless, I have voted a Strong Keep, for the sake of the community. ^^

I did it!

L.

Precisely.

I browse wikipedia for knowledge, and I expect that knowledge to actually be true.

I fully support getting that page deleted, unless it is proven to be 100% accurate and true.

Brb, voting for it to be redirected.

The page is already strongly linked to the bitcoin page. Thus a direct redirect is not an argument.

Good.

No point in panicking about it, the Wikipedia as a living document can always be altered as the situation changes. Half the things in there are questionable anyhow, allow the uber librarians to have their way for a short period, they eventually find midget porn and move on in life so a switch back to a standalone article goes unnoticed as they fill their tissues.

Votes don't matter at Wikipedia, only the discussion. Feel free to merge any relevant info into the Bitcoin wiki, since that page WILL be deleted.

on wikipedia they lately liek to cleanup everything.

For those of you who think the page should be deleted or redirected. It doesn't matter if Satoshi is his real name or not. The point is that he exists. Satoshi represents a real entity. Who cares if this entity also goes by another name. Satoshi's page should not be redirected to the bitcoin page for one fundamental reason... A person is not equivalent to an open source project. Satoshi has made a significant contribution to the world. It would be silly not to give his name a place on Wikipedia.

It wouldn't be deleted out of disrespect or anything so I don't see the issue.

Supposed to be! Wikipedia editors have to many vested interests for Wikipedia every to be as good as a "proper" encylopedia, although it is useful. ARSTechnica had a great story on it the other week regarding short-selling.

Either way it looks like it will be merged with the "Bitcoin" article.

If you want to prevent it being deleted, best plan is to add links to "reputable" sources.  The delete is that is isn't notable.

You can then point out that the links have been added to the main page in the delete discussion.

Happen to have a link? I can't find such an article on Ars, though I might not be looking hard enough.

Except that cultural history is fact. That the name Satoshi Nakamoto is now irrevocably linked in the collective mind to the origin of Bitcoin is fact. The paper exists, the quotes exist as supposedly originating with the person. They both represent either the work of an important person, OR the persona someone was trying to build of a non-existent but important person.

It is irrelevant whether that is his real name, or even if the person actually existed. The name is now a 'key' to a section of important historical events. It must be retained as a Wiki page, as a placeholder for everything that is known about the person. There are bound to be further revelations. Even if it turns out the name was a pseudonym for (say) an NSA psyops team tasked with poisoning the concept of virtual currencies, the page should still remain (with all the evidence.) Or, the person may turn up sometime. Or remain forever a mystery. Makes no difference to whether the page should be deleted or retained.

Historical revisionists - should all be shot. And the photos published.

Edit. Well, Wiki didn't waste any time scrubbing that page. "The result was merge to Bitcoin. Black Kite (t) (c) 00:31, 24 June 2011 (UTC)" Surge of 'strong keep' posts ignored.

Lets see...  The name 'Karpeles' apparently of Hebrew roots. Karpeles runs premier Bitcoin exchange/bank MtGox. (So funny!) Karpeles implicated in funny business involving huge amounts of bitcoins. If Satoshi's name reflects his origin, it's pretty unlikely he's from the same roots as Karpeles. Satoshi has disappeared, which may or may not be very useful to Karpeles. Someone mined a _lot_ of bitcoins back on 2009, then never touched them till just before the MtGox hack/crash. Current Bitcoin operators apparently depreciating Satoshi. Wikipedia allegedly controlled by Zionists. Wiki debate over removal of Satoshi wiki page proceeds like lightning.

Is there a pattern to these details?

Consolidation of information (which was the issue at hand) =/= historical revisionism. The cultural history of Satoshi was not at issue, simply the location of that information. The current cultural history related to Satoshi is directly and solely tied to the cultural history of BTC. As they noted in the discussion, if Satoshi does something noteworthy outside of his work with BTC, the page can be recreated. The information was not, as far as I can tell, deleted; it was merely moved.


You mean they concluded that a flash event right at the end was an outlier and therefore should be ignored? That sounds vaguely familiar...


And you're seriously tossing this in? Like, you're making a poor attempt at trolling or being funny, right? Right?? :(

I think the page should stay but with a short summary of what facts there are and a link to the bitcoin wikipedia page where people can read a whole history of Bitcoin/Satoshi.

What would be the difference between this and a simple redirect from the Satoshi page to the BTC page?

Number 1 rule of information management: duplication of potentially changing information is to be avoided like the PLAGUE.

Wiki-what?  Nevahoidovit.

Definitely should not be deleted.

It seems to be official. They have concluded that the page should be merged with the Bitcoin page. Does anyone who is more familiar with wikipedia processes believe they were fair in this decision?

I do not see the issue.  As long as the information is there, why does it matter whether it is in it's own article or in the main bitcoin article?

Just to bring closure to this old thread. Wikipedia finally gave Satoshi a well deserved page of his own, rather than combining him with the bitcoin page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satoshi_Nakamoto

That is the right thing to do, considering how great the bitcoin and blockchain technology is as an invention. No matter how successful or unsuccessfully the coin will be, it will be an important part of the evolution of "money".