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. Salvio 10:14, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coinfloor (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

notability per WP:GNG not established, Wird and TechCrunch coverage announcing the opening does not pass WP:NCORP, coverage is isolated and limited to opening and funding rounds. Sources like "Interactive Investor" are not reputable. Their blog cannot be sourced, it is primary. Ysangkok (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Ysangkok (talk) 16:56, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Wired, Sunday Times, and Techcrunch all did indepth articles on this. Easily passes coredepth, even though nothing seems to have happened on the article recently. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 20:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Wired article is entirely based on information provided by the company with zero "Independent Content" (as per WP:ORGIND). Similar articles (using the same quotes) can be found at this Verdict reference and this The Global Treasurer reference, fails WP:ORGIND. The ST article is similarly based on information provided by the company with zero "Independent Content". Also fails WP:ORGIND. Finally, the TechCrunch article is comments on content provided by the company at an invite-only Bitcoin conference, again with zero Independent Content. All three references fail WP:ORGIND. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:40, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Bitcoin is an important subject, this article describes a bitcoin exchange which is a worthy subject for an encyclopedia especially as it's a hot topic.Richwil (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Richwil: what is a hot topic? Cryptocurrencies or exchanges? If cryptocurrencies are a hot topic, how does that mean that an exchange automatically also becomes notable? There is no such consensus. --Ysangkok (talk) 17:26, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree with the nominator that articles about it opening are not enough to pass WP:NCORP. Companies open. That's what they do and it's an extremely trivial topic. Whomever is covering it. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:25, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete
  • This article says it has the same security as the Bank of England.
  • Second reference is now dead.
  • This link is self-referential and self-laudatory:
  • A link to the wayback machine to a page which says "To search the Supervised Businesses Register follow the link below" does not make sense.
  • HM Revenue and Customs link to Tax Guide to Cryptocurrencies is all very good; pointless as an actual reference for Coinfloor.
  • Remaining references are simply about Coinfloor as a startup. --Whiteguru (talk) 10:39, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I am unable to locate any significant coverage with in-depth information on the company and containing independent content, references to date including the churnalism ones mentioned above fail the criteria for establishing notability, topic therefore fails GNG/WP:NCORP. HighKing⁺⁺ 19:40, 17 August 2020 (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.