Deletion of Base58 (2nd nomination)

Comment: and selective merge to Binary-to-text_encoding#Encoding_standards, where the encoding already has an entry. A simple  style search shows plenty of secondary sources summarizing Base58 as an essential part of the Bitcoin design. This https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/mastering-bitcoin-2nd/9781491954379/ch04.html#base58 O'Reilly book has a nice section on it. O'Reilly is a reliable publisher with a reputation for fact checking and the author is independent of Satoshi, so the source is independent. Hence the assertion that there are no RS for this topic is wrong. Unfortunately, while there are plenty of short descriptions among sources found, I have not found any in-depth discussions. We still have verifiable content suitable for alternatives to deletion, however, and per our policy  finding such alternatives is preferred over deletion. If we had a page devoted to Bitcoin implementation, that would be a perfect target. But the encoding article mentioned by Deacon Vorbis is also a good target with good context for this class of algorithms. I recommend merging some sources (like the O'Reilly book) for verification of the Base58 entry. --&#123;&#123;u&#124
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:ATD)

Comment: Doesn't satisfy . I check the resources (Also tried to find usage|citations through the literature), Nothing good enough to establish notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: An excellent suggestion {{ping|Spacepine}}. I believe the subject is notable, so I agree with your suggestion. -M to Base36/Base58/Base62
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)