[Project] Bitcoin: A Living Archive — feedback and source corrections welcome

[Akos26]

Hello everyone,

I am developing a small independent bilingual project called Bitcoin: A Living Archive.
The idea is to collect and organize Bitcoin history, technical explanations, wallet lessons, important mistakes, unusual decisions, and personal stories — without price promises, referral links, or promotional hype.
English version: Bitcoin: A Living Archive
The archive is still developing, and I would genuinely appreciate critical feedback from people who know Bitcoin and its history.

I would especially appreciate help with:
- factual errors or missing primary sources;
- important stories that should be preserved;
- whether articles are placed in the appropriate sections;
- navigation and reading experience;
- subjects that deserve a deeper article.

We want this to remain a living archive rather than a finished publication. Corrections and evidence-based disagreement are welcome.

For transparency: I use a writing assistant for translation and editing. The project direction, source selection, personal material, and publication decisions remain my responsibility.

Thank you for taking a look.

[hugeblack]

Are these articles authored by specific authors, or are they summaries of articles listed in primary sources?

I read two articles, and they were more like summaries with no author's name. Therefore, the quality of the articles will be low unless the writer has extensive knowledge.

The UI is nice, and the idea is good; you might need to hire a good writer.

[Akos26]

Are these articles authored by specific authors, or are they summaries of articles listed in primary sources?

I read two articles, and they were more like summaries with no author's name. Therefore, the quality of the articles will be low unless the writer has extensive knowledge.

The UI is nice, and the idea is good; you might need to hire a good writer.

You are right: most current materials are editorial summaries and conclusions based on several articles and primary sources, rather than original expert essays. The “Personal Stories” section is intended for individually authored first-person accounts. We will label these formats and authorship more clearly.

[hugeblack]

You are right: most current materials are editorial summaries and conclusions based on several articles and primary sources, rather than original expert essays. The “Personal Stories” section is intended for individually authored first-person accounts. We will label these formats and authorship more clearly.

Good work and best of luck. If you have a budget (even a limited one), you can hire a writer from the forum members (post in the services section^[1]) and you'll get the best result at the lowest possible price.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=52.0

[steve5946]

Hello everyone,

I am developing a small independent bilingual project called Bitcoin: A Living Archive.
The idea is to collect and organize Bitcoin history, technical explanations, wallet lessons, important mistakes, unusual decisions, and personal stories — without price promises, referral links, or promotional hype.
English version: Bitcoin: A Living Archive
The archive is still developing, and I would genuinely appreciate critical feedback from people who know Bitcoin and its history.

I would especially appreciate help with:
- factual errors or missing primary sources;
- important stories that should be preserved;
- whether articles are placed in the appropriate sections;
- navigation and reading experience;
- subjects that deserve a deeper article.

We want this to remain a living archive rather than a finished publication. Corrections and evidence-based disagreement are welcome.

For transparency: I use a writing assistant for translation and editing. The project direction, source selection, personal material, and publication decisions remain my responsibility.

Thank you for taking a look.

This is a really worthwhile project, especially because Bitcoin history is scattered across old forum posts, mailing lists, technical documents, and personal accounts that can easily disappear or become difficult to find.

I hope you can focus on preserving mistakes and lessons rather than turning the archive into another promotional Bitcoin site. I’d suggest putting extra emphasis on linking to primary sources wherever possible, especially for historical claims, and clearly separating documented facts from personal recollections or interpretations.

[Akos26]

You are right: most current materials are editorial summaries and conclusions based on several articles and primary sources, rather than original expert essays. The “Personal Stories” section is intended for individually authored first-person accounts. We will label these formats and authorship more clearly.

Good work and best of luck. If you have a budget (even a limited one), you can hire a writer from the forum members (post in the services section^[1]) and you'll get the best result at the lowest possible price.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=52.0

Thank you for the suggestion and the link. I will consider involving an experienced writer or reviewer as the archive develops.

[Akos26]

Hello everyone,

I am developing a small independent bilingual project called Bitcoin: A Living Archive.
The idea is to collect and organize Bitcoin history, technical explanations, wallet lessons, important mistakes, unusual decisions, and personal stories — without price promises, referral links, or promotional hype.
English version: Bitcoin: A Living Archive
The archive is still developing, and I would genuinely appreciate critical feedback from people who know Bitcoin and its history.

I would especially appreciate help with:
- factual errors or missing primary sources;
- important stories that should be preserved;
- whether articles are placed in the appropriate sections;
- navigation and reading experience;
- subjects that deserve a deeper article.

We want this to remain a living archive rather than a finished publication. Corrections and evidence-based disagreement are welcome.

For transparency: I use a writing assistant for translation and editing. The project direction, source selection, personal material, and publication decisions remain my responsibility.

Thank you for taking a look.

This is a really worthwhile project, especially because Bitcoin history is scattered across old forum posts, mailing lists, technical documents, and personal accounts that can easily disappear or become difficult to find.

I hope you can focus on preserving mistakes and lessons rather than turning the archive into another promotional Bitcoin site. I’d suggest putting extra emphasis on linking to primary sources wherever possible, especially for historical claims, and clearly separating documented facts from personal recollections or interpretations.

Thank you. This is exactly the direction we want to follow: preserving mistakes and lessons, prioritizing primary sources, and clearly separating documented facts from personal accounts and interpretations.