Post
Topic
Board Meta
Merits 1 from 1 user
Re: Wrong information about BitcoinTalk history on Wikipedia
by
Rizzrack
on 18/11/2021, 11:03:32 UTC
⭐ Merited by JayJuanGee (1)
I just made a request to whitelist the unofficial rules and FAQ thread.

Nice ! Hope it gets approved soon !

My additions about the bitcointalk hacks were deleted because the citations (from coindesk and others) are not considered reliable sources.

I have no qualms about Coindesk in particular but given most bitcoin news is grossly inaccurate, it makes quite hard to find a reliable (by their standards) source.

Based on what I saw on their "reliable sources page" coindesk is definitely not considered a reliable source. Did not even see even one single "reliable" crypto website in that list...

Quote
There is consensus that CoinDesk should not be used to establish notability for article topics, and that it should be avoided in favor of more mainstream sources. Check CoinDesk articles for conflict of interest disclosures, and verify whether their parent company (Digital Currency Group) has an ownership stake in a company covered by CoinDesk

The fact that they tend to be anti-crypto is pretty obvious:

Quote
Quartz
Quartz is considered generally reliable for factual reporting, although some editors argue that caution should be used for science and bitcoin topics.