- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tornado Cash
- ... that Tornado Cash, a cryptocurrency tumbler, was blacklisted by the United States Department of the Treasury for allegedly allowing criminals to launder more than $7 billion in virtual currencies? Source: “The Treasury Department on Monday prohibited Americans from using the cryptocurrency platform Tornado Cash, saying the service has helped criminals launder more than $7 billion of virtual currencies.” The New York Times
Created by Thriley (talk) and PabloCastellano (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 18:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC).
The article is currently at 1360 characters readable prose (it needs 1500), and it has a citation needed tag. @Thriley and PabloCastellano: This must be addressed first. Hook looks interesting, but ping me when the other issues are fixed. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 16:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie: The article has been expanded to over 1500 characters. I removed the line that was not cited as I could not find a reliable source for it. Thriley (talk) 19:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Thriley:
Had to edit to put the hook fact in the article with its citation. Also did some copyediting. This is ready. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:08, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie: Thank you! Thriley (talk) 22:24, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie and Thriley: are there no BLP issues in saying on the Main Page that a company "allegedly" laundered $7 billion? I mean, especially when the Wall Street Journal writes that private journalists dispute that claim... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:13, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie: Thank you! Thriley (talk) 22:24, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Thriley:
- @Sammi Brie: The article has been expanded to over 1500 characters. I removed the line that was not cited as I could not find a reliable source for it. Thriley (talk) 19:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
@Theleekycauldron: you have a fair point. I missed that detail. Perhaps this ALT1. I also note a "How it works" section with no sources has been added, and @Thriley and PabloCastellano: need to fix that. I have found a source [1] that is not a Forbes contributor, so you can add it for this ALT1. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:27, 4 September 2022 (UTC)- ALT1: ... that in response to the blacklisting of Tornado Cash, a cryptocurrency tumbler, users sent tainted Ethereum to celebrities and tech CEOs?
- This paper on arxiv.org reviews ZK-Snarks protocols and applications, including Tornado Cash. Do you think it is a valid reference? --PabloCastellano (talk) 11:29, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- No. ArXiv is a preprint server that performs only loose checks for whether its papers are on-topic, not a full peer review. As such, publications that exist only on arXiv are not generally considered to be reliable sources for Wikipedia purposes. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:51, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- The link to the official whitepaper is not available anymore but I have added the version cached in archive.org now. --PabloCastellano (talk) 11:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- No. ArXiv is a preprint server that performs only loose checks for whether its papers are on-topic, not a full peer review. As such, publications that exist only on arXiv are not generally considered to be reliable sources for Wikipedia purposes. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:51, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
- This paper on arxiv.org reviews ZK-Snarks protocols and applications, including Tornado Cash. Do you think it is a valid reference? --PabloCastellano (talk) 11:29, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Thriley and PabloCastellano: Where are we on this? Is the arXiv preprint needed? I'd accept the whitepaper as an ABOUTSELF reference. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- I added a link to the official whitepaper and left the arXiv preprint so I think it is ready. --PabloCastellano (talk) 11:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
- @PabloCastellano: arXiv is generally unreliable. That reference has to go before this goes to DYK. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:53, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
- I added a link to the official whitepaper and left the arXiv preprint so I think it is ready. --PabloCastellano (talk) 11:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
@Sammi Brie: I just removed that reference. Thriley (talk) 22:12, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- I think this is...fine. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 04:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Much of the article has been removed, including the hook by David Gerard. Pinging Sammi Brie, Thriley, and PabloCastellano. SL93 (talk) 20:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- I think the concern here is sourcing, unfortunately. I tried to bolster the weak spots with additional refs, but...there really isn't much more to say. Honestly, it might be time to mark this nomination for closure. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
- I find it nonsense and I won't spend time arguing with Wikipedia librarians or other users (lesson already learnt). The dusting attack is real and can be documented by simply using any Ethereum block explorer or analytics platform as references. Are they welcome in Wikipedia? I guess no. I'm afraid we won't see this kind of news anytime soon in websites that are not specialized in cryptocurrency, and thus, they are invalid references for Wikipedia. I'm moving on. Thanks for your time and good will, Sammi. --PabloCastellano (talk) 09:51, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Is the issue that there are no reliable sources from before the August news? Currently the article is 2190 characters and reads ok. Thriley (talk) 14:06, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Thriley The hook isn't in the article. SL93 (talk) 14:19, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- I see! Is there a way to resurrect the primary hook? Thriley (talk) 14:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Sammi Brie Theleekycauldron What about ALT0a ... that Tornado Cash, a cryptocurrency tumbler, was blacklisted by the United States Department of the Treasury? It is true and removes the allegedly. SL93 (talk) 14:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- @SL93: They seem to have lost interest, so I'll take over. I added some reliable sources found through ProQuest to substantiate some of the information in the lead, and added two independent sources to the Functionality section. None of this has substantially transformed the prose of the article, I believe; the added sources to the Functionality section mostly paraphrase the whitepaper anyway, for example. Approve ALT0a as interesting and directly sourced. DigitalIceAge (talk) 19:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
- Sammi Brie Theleekycauldron What about ALT0a ... that Tornado Cash, a cryptocurrency tumbler, was blacklisted by the United States Department of the Treasury? It is true and removes the allegedly. SL93 (talk) 14:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- I see! Is there a way to resurrect the primary hook? Thriley (talk) 14:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)