BitCoin Wikipedia page DELETED!!!

[em3rgentOrdr]

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin

"This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

10:42, 30 July 2010 Polargeo (talk | contribs) deleted "Bitcoin" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitcoin)"

[kiba]

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin

"This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

10:42, 30 July 2010 Polargeo (talk | contribs) deleted "Bitcoin" ‎ (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitcoin)"

Boohoo. They don't like us. Big deal.

[fresno]

Wiki-who? Never heard of it!

Is it some sort of ukulele band?

[Anonymous]

It is ironic that wikipedia itself isnt accepted as a reliable source when you quote from  it in an argument.  Apparently you are only notable if a celebrity mentions you.

[ichi]

I didn't suggest reading ae's Wikipedia page    And I definitely didn't link to it.

[Anonymous]

I didn't suggest reading ae's Wikipedia page    And I definitely didn't link to it.

I definitely didnt read it 

[knightmb]

I've started the undelete request here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Bitcoin

If anyone wants to participate, just edit my undelete request and add more reasons why you think it wasn't fair to delete the article.

[Anonymous]

What is funny to me, is all the other pages on there asking for undeletion... are garage bands, wanna be "upcoming actors", and start up companies trying to advertise...

Without in depth examination, it appears we are the only such type of article that has been deleted asking for reinstatement. Someone must have really been PMSy to request the deletion in the first place.

The admin who deleted the article is an expert on glaciers .

Does this make him an ice-hole?
 

[Bitquux]

The admin who deleted the article is an expert on glaciers .

That would explain why he's got the time to admin for wikipedia.

[Anonymous]

The admin who deleted the article is an expert on glaciers .

That would explain why he's got the time to admin for wikipedia.

I cant believe bitcoin got hit by an ice berg.

[knightmb]

Instead of wasting with them (they do frustrate me sometimes), why not create a new article at a more "friendly" place like
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Citizendium

Citizendium is a wiki that seems to be a compromise between the free-for-all that is Wikipedia and the strict supervision that accompanies Scholarpedia. One of Wikipedia's founders, Larry Sanger, created Citizendium in the hopes of improving on Wikipedia's model. With what the site refers to as "gentle oversight", all articles are subject to approval by the site's editorial team. Articles that haven't been approved will have an accompanying disclaimer, which helps to prevent people from taking potentially false information to heart. Also, you must register under your real name to become a contributor, unlike Wikipedia. Although the site is still in beta form, it is quickly becoming a popular alternative to Wikipedia.

[throughput]

Well, wikipedia is not a public driven project. It is driven by a limited community of it's editors,
that is for a long time. Wikipedia represent collective and often inconsistent point of view
of a small (compared to society) group of people.
"Playing by the rules" is a favorite game of them. Don't play that game, do not entertain them.

I believe, it is some form of sexual perversion, wikipedism or like that... 

Just find another wikipedia editor and he will play instead of you.

[kiba]

Well, wikipedia is not a public driven project. It is driven by a limited community of it's editors,
that is for a long time. Wikipedia represent collective and often inconsistent point of view
of a small (compared to society) group of people.
"Playing by the rules" is a favorite game of them. Don't play that game, do not entertain them.

I believe, it is some form of sexual perversion, wikipedism or like that... 

Just find another wikipedia editor and he will play instead of you.

There is Wikipedia and its hierarchy, just like government and their hierarchy. The idea that the government could represent the people is laughable.

Similarly, the Wikipedia hierarchy devolved into politicking, no sexual perversion needed.

[joechip]

Well, wikipedia is not a public driven project. It is driven by a limited community of it's editors,
that is for a long time. Wikipedia represent collective and often inconsistent point of view
of a small (compared to society) group of people.
"Playing by the rules" is a favorite game of them. Don't play that game, do not entertain them.

I believe, it is some form of sexual perversion, wikipedism or like that... 

Just find another wikipedia editor and he will play instead of you.

There is Wikipedia and its hierarchy, just like government and their hierarchy. The idea that the government could represent the people is laughable.

Similarly, the Wikipedia hierarchy devolved into politicking, no sexual perversion needed.

When they moved to that model the outcome was inevitable.... personal empire building.  If it continues to a point where it destroys the product, something else will rise to challenge it, as long as they don't use the gov't to enforce their 'right' to be the arbitrators of 'editorial standards.'

Ta,

[throughput]

Well, wikipedia is not a public driven project. It is driven by a limited community of it's editors,
that is for a long time. Wikipedia represent collective and often inconsistent point of view
of a small (compared to society) group of people.
"Playing by the rules" is a favorite game of them. Don't play that game, do not entertain them.

I believe, it is some form of sexual perversion, wikipedism or like that... 

Just find another wikipedia editor and he will play instead of you.

There is Wikipedia and its hierarchy, just like government and their hierarchy. The idea that the government could represent the people is laughable.

Similarly, the Wikipedia hierarchy devolved into politicking, no sexual perversion needed.

Agree.
I just count politicking itself as some form of sexual perversion, or like that...

Anyway, contacting wikipedia editor, who is external to this situation, will help a lot.

[omegadraconis]

Wanted to add another reference here that I found via http://scholar.google.com/ http://yuumei.co.uk/files/dissertation.pdf. It is a paper Titled "The Impact of Decentralization on Networked Computer Games" Written by Ashley Vaughan Smith of School of Computing, University of Derby. The paper mentions bitcoins as a good currency for online games. It is only about a paragraph but, I think a research paper for a University would count as an independent 3rd party and may be more of what Wikipedia would like to see.

[NewLibertyStandard]

Wanted to add another reference here that I found via http://scholar.google.com/ http://yuumei.co.uk/files/dissertation.pdf. It is a paper Titled "The Impact of Decentralization on Networked Computer Games" Written by Ashley Vaughan Smith of School of Computing, University of Derby. The paper mentions bitcoins as a good currency for online games. It is only about a paragraph but, I think a research paper for a University would count as an independent 3rd party and may be more of what Wikipedia would like to see.

I beat ya to it by almost two weeks. Not that anyone looks through my rambling lists.

[Lemming]

Somebody (possibly knightmb?) should request Userfication of the deleted article, to preserve the content.

[knightmb]

Somebody (possibly knightmb?) should request Userfication of the deleted article, to preserve the content.

I just saw that myself, I haven't had time to dig through all the links to see what the process is since the Administrators don't have a direct "contact me" button anywhere. 

[omegadraconis]

Google cache has it: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:hyQZi6xkulEJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin+bitcoins&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us and Message_From_Xenu(not sure who that is on the forums) has it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Message_From_Xenu/Bitcoin