Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bitnation (2nd nomination)
Fails  miserably as entirely promotional. Not only that but none of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability. http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/11/opinions/isis-iraq-syria-global-passport/ The CNN reference is a mention-in-passing and fails . There's been one or two stating that http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/24/the-crypto-libertarians-using-technology-to-undermine-the-nation/ the Telegraph article meets the criteria for establishing notability but since the facts and details are from the founder with no independent opinions expressed, it is not intellectually independent and also fails . https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2016/04/03/ethereum-towards-a-new-bitsociety/#30a5cc8a3adc The Forbes article (like just about all the Forbes articles I've examined) fails also as it merely repeats what BitNation says about itself and fails  and is not intellectually independent. Cunard's mini-novel contains the usual overly-long and excessive quotations which often resemble the results of searching for the search term in "reliable sources" with no thorough examination of whether the reference itself is intellectually independent or otherwise meets the criteria for establishing notability. Although it is a total mish-mash, occasionally Cunard turns up some gems which are good references. So for the sake of completeness.... the first reference from a book by Jamie Bartlett is clearly an interview with the founder and therefore fails as a PRIMARY source, not intellectually independent, and fails both  and . The next reference is a Vice article and once again contains extensive quotations from the founder and from an "ambassador" ... but I believe it meets the criteria for establishing notability as it also provides opinions from unconnected and intellectually independent sources such as Dr. Jennifer Jackson-Preece from LSE and includes the journalist's own opinion.https://panampost.com/belen-marty/2014/10/17/bitnation-founder-on-a-mission-for-stateless-governance/ The PanAmPost reference fails since it relies almost exclusively on an interview with the founder and fails  and/or . http://www.dw.com/en/bitnation-the-virtual-country/a-19116934 The final reference from dw.com fails as it is an interview from another "ambassador" and is therefore a PRIMARY source and fails  and . A common misunderstanding of the Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources that are Wikipedia:Independent sources|independent of the subject" is that it is the *source* which must be independent but this is incorrect. It is the reference itself which must be independent. Clearly, an "independent source" can publish a company announcement word-for-word and still remain an independent source but the reference would not be independent. Many of the examples provided appear to fall foul of this misunderstanding. In summary, the criteria for establishing notability has not beet met
— User:HighKing, 18:28, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:SPIP||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:ORGIND||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND||WP:CORPDEPTH||WP:ORGIND (Wikipedia:Notability)