Now that we as a community are placing a stronger focus on marketing and adoption, and with the surge of recent articles both by the Nano Foundation and other companies regarding the recent updates to the protocol (to be used as sources), is the time right to start pushing for a Wikipedia article?
There are already 2 articles on Yahoo Finance, that should be enough to push a Wikipedia article.
There have been several attempts, and the commenters declining the submission have usually mentioned that the articles cited are not substantively about Nano and not from reliable secondary sources.
See the most recent submission here with the comments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nano_(cryptocurrency)
The citations in this submission are the most reliable that we have been able to find and have removed many academic articles that were not either published in a peer reviewed journal or presented at a conference.
If anyone comes across any new substantive and reliable citations please pass them on.
Seems like the main issue is actually "no significant media coverage outside of nano website itself." Do you think that the recent articles/posts on kraken, changelly, wirex, kappture, and others might be enough to change that?
The Binance article is pretty in depth, wonder if that counts for anything here?
The Kappture whitepaper goes into detail about NANO too, I think that would be useful?
The issue with citations is that they need to be either published in a journal, presented at a meeting, or come from a reliable independent source from recognised publishers
There has been a number of submissions for a potential Nano Wikipedia article, and most all of them have been denied on grounds of not having enough substantial sources.
With that being said, there have been a number of published research papers and news articles since the last submission, so we are getting closer to having enough cited material for another draft. Theres a working group of community members who have been tracking sources from news articles and research papers over the last year, if you are interested in joining please let me know.
Also, I'd like to stress the importance of not submitting your own draft to Wikipedia. Too many drafts submitted will result in us getting blacklisted, so we've been careful to slow down the rate of submissions to let more research papers and articles to come out. So please, if you're interested in making a submission let me know and I'll add you to the working group.
I think we may attempt another submission before the end of the year, though I'm not certain.
Can you add me to the group? I’ve been editing the draft on Wikipedia, which seems like the logical place to collaborate on this.
Yep, send me a PM on the Nano Discord and I'll get you an invite
After the article is done, you should try to mention nano on this pages:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptocurrency (average of 4000 daily visits)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed_acyclic_graph (average of 1000 !!!! daily visits)
I assume that people who visit this pages are people interested in crypto and new to crypto - the kind of people we want to find about nano.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cryptocurrencies (average of 894 daily visits)
It would be nice if we would find a book that mentions nano. There are so many books about cryptocurrencies, it would be weird if none of those mentions nano.
I found two Thesis that talk about Nano, maybe they can be used as references in the article:
Continuing the discussion from Wikipedia article (requested):
This paper also mentions Nano: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.04098.pdf.
Another one: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.07091.pdf
That last one is very thorough.
Thanks for those Fiono! I added them to the draft.
The Wikipedia article is live! Thanks to all who helped bring it to fruition.
Now that the article is public, we have begun the process of migrating the discussion and maintenance to a public channel within the Nano Discord. If you'd like to help, see the #wikipedia channel in chat.nano.org
Nano is now in Wikipedia's 'List of Cryptocurrencies':
It's actually in with a small formatting error in the table (for a now obsolete 'Governance' column.)
I did ask on the Talk page for that to be corrected - and got told it already had been corrected (though it hasn't.)
( But actually I don't really mind if that error stays forever - because it makes Nano's row slightly stand out from all the others! )