Draft:Gold Physical Bitcoins

On July 21, 2014, Forbes published an article titled “Chinese Bitcoin enthusiasts create physical Bitcoins out of pure gold”^[1], which cited an article from the blockchain portal 8btc.com (which was shut down in 2020). The article showed exquisite gold coins, each engraved with information indicating that the holder would receive one Bitcoin. The author explicitly stated that these gold coins were for private collection only and could not be used for market circulation. Each gold coin was made of pure gold, weighed one ounce, and had a private key engraved on the back in the form of a QR code. Although these tokens were not designed for trading, it was still impossible to determine whether the previous holders had secretly kept copies of the private keys.

Submission declined on 16 December 2025 by MCE89 (talk). This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that: provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, not just brief mentions or routine announcements; are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight; are independent: not connected to the subject, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content. Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia. If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted. If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted. Where to get help If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews. If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed. How to improve a draft Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia. Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Add tags to your draft Editor resources Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Declined by MCE89 3 months ago. Last edited by MCE89 3 months ago. Reviewer: Inform author. Resubmit Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

Submission declined on 16 December 2025 by ChrysGalley (talk). This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers. Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute. Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed. Declined by ChrysGalley 3 months ago.

Submission declined on 16 December 2025 by DoubleGrazing (talk). This draft is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources include: reputable newspapers, magazines, academic journals, and books from respected publishers. Unacceptable sources include: personal blogs, social media, predatory publishers, most tabloids, and websites where anyone can contribute. Replace any unreliable sources with high-quality sources. If you cannot find a reliable source for the material, it should be removed. This draft's references do not show that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that: provide significant coverage: discuss the subject in detail, not just brief mentions or routine announcements; are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight; are independent: not connected to the subject, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content. Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia. Declined by DoubleGrazing 3 months ago.

• Comment: The Forbes source was written by a Forbes contributor, which means it is not considered a reliable source due to a lack of editorial control. CoinDesk cannot be used to establish notability, and I am unsure of the reliability of Finance Magnates. MCE89 (talk) 13:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: The article isn't properly sourced. There are 3 sources, of which Forbes is the most reliable, so this also questions notability, see WP:GNG. But there are a lot of statements made with no sources and open to challenge. See WP:REFB. A few quick edits will not be enough here. ChrysGalley (talk) 10:19, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Finance Magnates reported on this in its July 22, 2014 article, "Better than Bitcoin for gold: Chinese Bitcoin enthusiasts create physical Bitcoin in pure gold," ^[2]and blockchain media CoinDesk also mentioned the coin in its September 15, 2014 article, "10 physical Bitcoins: good, bad, and ugly."^[3]