Difference between revisions of "Talk:Litecoin"

From Bitcoin Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Follow-up to Ripper234 edit)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== NPOV attempts ==
+
So, we have Namecoin and Devcoin, but not Litecoin? [[User:Newar|Newar]] ([[User talk:Newar|talk]]) 18:33, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 
+
: Altcoins are off-topic, see the policy. Shouldn't have the others either --[[User:Luke-jr|Luke-jr]] ([[User talk:Luke-jr|talk]]) 08:29, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Ripper234 apparently disagrees with the wording of "Bitcoin does not suffer from these "flaws" and therefore does not fall under the "pump and dump" scheme, according to this argument." despite its [[Litecoin#Pump and Dump Scheme|context]]. I've been pondering a way to rephrase it, but not coming up with any good solutions. Anyone else want to take a shot at it? (please don't remove either component of the statement, as they are both relevant to the meaning) --[[User:Luke-jr|Luke-jr]] ([[User talk:Luke-jr|talk]]) 02:10, 25 March 2013 (GMT)
+
:: I've redirected Litecoin to Scrypt. While Litecoin itself admittedly doesn't belong on the Bitcoin Wiki, Scrypt PoW ''is'' a technology that was significant to the mining industry as a whole. I'm still not sure if it belongs - it'd be a little documentary about TBX and LTC's rise and fall - I'm wondering if we should just get rid of it entirely. [[User:Taras|Taras]] ([[User talk:Taras|talk]]) 05:10, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 05:10, 10 January 2015

So, we have Namecoin and Devcoin, but not Litecoin? Newar (talk) 18:33, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Altcoins are off-topic, see the policy. Shouldn't have the others either --Luke-jr (talk) 08:29, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
I've redirected Litecoin to Scrypt. While Litecoin itself admittedly doesn't belong on the Bitcoin Wiki, Scrypt PoW is a technology that was significant to the mining industry as a whole. I'm still not sure if it belongs - it'd be a little documentary about TBX and LTC's rise and fall - I'm wondering if we should just get rid of it entirely. Taras (talk) 05:10, 10 January 2015 (UTC)