This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cryptocurrency article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 12 months

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination: Keep, 4 June 2013 (UTC), see discussion. Delete, 14 March 2011, see discussion.

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Cryptocurrency Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptocurrency, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cryptocurrency on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CryptocurrencyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptocurrencyTemplate:WikiProject CryptocurrencyWikiProject Cryptocurrency Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Economics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Cryptography: Computer science High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cryptography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CryptographyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptographyTemplate:WikiProject CryptographyCryptography High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as High-importance). Finance & Investment Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Kevin Purdy (January 16, 2025). "The Editors weaves Wikipedia's volunteers into a global suspense tale". Ars Technica. Retrieved January 17, 2025. Well, there are a lot of dedicated volunteers. If a page is getting a lot of eyeballs, like cryptocurrency, for example, that's a page that people are going to be monitoring with some vigilance.

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS The article Cryptocurrency, along with other pages relating to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are: Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period) Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. Remedy instructions and exemptions Enforcement procedures: Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard. Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned. With respect to any reverting restrictions: Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion. Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism. Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction. Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Hello, I’d like to propose a small addition to the “Adoption” section to include an example of cryptocurrency use in the iGaming industry, which is a growing use case. The suggested text is:

“Cryptocurrencies have gained traction in the iGaming industry, enabling instant transactions and betting on platforms like Stake, Coincasino, toshi.bet and roobet." Senorwolferoni (talk) 15:28, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We should not be making lists of gambling sites, that's an obvious magnet for spam. MrOllie (talk) 15:39, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, keep it general, refs would be good as well. Selfstudier (talk) 16:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Understood.

So just Cryptocurrencies have gained traction in the iGaming industry, enabling instant transactions and betting on platforms.

Yes? Thanks for the feedback guys. Learning how to edit/do suggestions right now on wiki properly. Senorwolferoni (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Gained traction" and "iGaming industry" are business cliches that impart very little meaning. Likewise, despite being a crypto talking point, it is never "instant", either, so this would need context. If you know of a reliable source, propose that for discussion, but make sure it is reliable and not spam or similar. Grayfell (talk) 22:11, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I reworked the section a while back but a third paragraph has been added that messes up the section and contradicts the first paragraph.

I can no longer work on the page because it has been protected, so can someone move the second paragraph (The term "physical bitcoin" is used ... a "custodian".) to the end and merge the first and third paragraphs. I would suggest the merger:

Physical cryptocurrency coins have been made as promotional items and some have become collectibles among crypto enthusiasts and numismatists.[ref] For example, physical "bitcoins", such as Casascius and Titan, have been struck in silver or gold versions.[ref] Other promotional physical coins have a private key embedded in them to access crypto worth a few dollars. There have also been attempts to issue bitcoin "bank notes".[ref]Yankinthebank (talk) 00:42, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TRON should be mentioned in the Altcoins section. In addition to being a high-throughput blockchain with ~3-second block times and low fees—comparable to or faster than Litecoin—it has recently overtaken Ethereum in total circulating supply of USDT, which is the most transacted stablecoin. This shift reflects growing adoption of TRON as a settlement layer, presumably due to its lower fees and faster confirmation times relative to Ethereum.

Suggested sentence:

‘‘TRON, a blockchain with 3-second block times and low fees, has become the dominant network for USDT transactions, overtaking Ethereum in total USDT supply in 2025.Allison, Ian (2025-05-14). "Tron Overtakes Ethereum in USDT Circulation". CoinDesk. Retrieved 2025-06-04.’’

Let me know if this should be revised further or if there’s a more appropriate section for it.

Please no Coindesk. Retimuko (talk)

The redirect R/Buttcoin has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 27 § R/Buttcoin until a consensus is reached. मल्ल (talk) 17:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I propose adding a sentence to the "Physical crypto" section to document the historical existence of pure gold physical bitcoins produced in 2014, as verified by multiple independent sources.

Current text: ...coins made of silver, brass or aluminum sometimes with gold plating, or Titan Bitcoin, which in silver or gold versions are sought after by numismatists.

Proposed addition (in bold): ...coins made of silver, brass or aluminum sometimes with gold plating. **In 2014, unique efforts were made to mint physical bitcoins in pure gold to target the collector market, such as a limited run produced in China reported by Forbes, Cointelegraph, and Finance Magnates.^[1][2][3]**

Reasoning: The article currently lacks specific mention of "pure gold" (Au 99.9%) minting efforts from 2014. These historical artifacts are distinct from common gold-plated versions and have been thoroughly documented by Forbes, Cointelegraph, and Finance Magnates. Bits86 (talk) 07:49, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sources listed are not reliable sources. Forbes is not a reliable secondary source WP:FORBESCON and the primary source is a Chinese blog post.

Also physical crypto in this context doesn't mean gold coins, it means ETP/ETF products exchanged. Sibshops (talk) 15:06, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: per the above response. Day Creature (talk) 16:11, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]