Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MimbleWimble

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. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:36, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MimbleWimble

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No evidence of notability. No coverage that I could find in RSes on a WP:BEFORE - all coverage is primary, unreliable or crypto sites. No suitable redirect targets. Contested PROD, though the evidence proffered was this IBTimes story - but IBTimes is listed on WP:RSP as generally unreliable, so not a source of notability. David Gerard (talk) 22:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 22:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since no evidence of notability adequate for a stand-alone article can be found. The text seems great for a brochure, though. Someone should save it up. -The Gnome (talk) 11:04, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Devokewater @ 10:51, 2 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.