Talk:Ethereum

Go-Ethereum is an implementation, client, or engine of the Ethereum Virtual Machine. The URL for the repository would be better as "www.github.com/ethereum". However this is compounded by the repository URL apparently being taken from the reference to the Go Ethereum repository for the license, being the only place that the reference occurs. Furthermore there are more licenses than GPLv3, LGPLv, others have been used such as MIT in many repos, Apache 2.0,^[1] CC BY-SA 4.0,^[2] MPL-2.0^[3].(unsigned Talk page comment added by User:Jamesray1 on 2018-01-11T05:33:35)

This has been highly reported recently, abetted by Kim Kardashian's pumping of it. Surely it should be on Wikipedia by now.

E.g. From

He [Charles Randell, chair of the UK Financial Conduct Authority] then trained his attention on Kardashian, who, he noted, recently plugged "Ethereum Max" to 250 million Instagram followers.

"In line with Instagram's rules, she disclosed that this was an #AD," Randell said. "But she didn't have to disclose that Ethereum Max — not to be confused with ethereum — was a speculative digital token created a month before by unknown developers, one of hundreds of such tokens that fill the crypto-exchanges."

Randell acknowledged that he can't say whether this particular token is a scam. But he emphasized that regulators needed to do more to rein in this type of online activity. Platforms like Facebook (FB), Twitter (TWTR) and TikTok, he said, also need to "step up."

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/07/investing/kim-kardashian-crypto-regulators/index.html

And:

Kim Kardashian has been criticised for promoting an untested cryptocurrency on Instagram, by the head of the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

Charles Randell said Ms Kardashian had "asked her 250 million followers to speculate on crypto tokens" by promoting an advert for Ethereum Max.

He called it "a speculative digital token created a month before by unknown developers".

And he accused influencers of fuelling the "delusions of quick riches".

Mr Randell was speaking to the Cambridge International Symposium on Economic Crime.

The FCA chairman said Ms Kardashian's Instagram post, which he noted had been correctly flagged as an ad, may have been the "financial promotion with the single biggest audience reach in history".

The promoted token Ethereum Max was, he stressed, not to be confused with the Ethereum cryptocurrency.

"I can't say whether this particular token [Ethereum Max] is a scam," he said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-58462517

The "Stable release" field in the infobox should probably contain the name of the current protocol version ("Dencun" as of writing this) and not the version of any client implementation. Adu1000 (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. It makes no sense to have a stable version of a single client since there are 10+ clients (across the consensus and execution layers). I've now updated it to Fusaka. HSukePup (talk) 01:10, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

"As of January 2016," --- this is almost a decade old. Surely the ¶ that follows shouldn't be worded as if this were still current. If it _is_ still current, this should be updated with a new source. 78.243.50.114 (talk) 11:08, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Same with "A proposal to partition global state and computation into shard chains was presented at Ethereum's Devcon 3 in November 2017.[90] If implemented, each node in the network would only have to store and validate a subset of the network." Was it implemented or not? Is it still pending, nearly 8 years later? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.243.50.114 (talk) 11:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

This is a phrasing that we use across wikipedia. We are an encyclopedia and we cover the past, we dont try to be up to date. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 11:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

The entire Ethereum roadmap has been rollup-centric since 2020-2021. Article is lacking a section on rollups and L2 scalability. HSukePup (talk) 07:01, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

We need sources please. What WP:NOT applies here. So please find mainstream sources. Social media, github, cryptocurrency sites, etc are all not RS here. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:07, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, crypto is one of those industries where mainstream sources are pretty unreliable while specialized crypto research sites are often the most reliable and technically-accurate. WP:RSAGE is often a concern. By "crypto sites", what kind of crypto sites would qualify as a good source, and which as a bad source? And what about crypto news sites since they're usually the only ones that report on project development?

Ethereum.org's Scaling page should be fine right since that's a primary original source.

But what about Vitalik Buterin's posts on Ethereum Magicians, which is where Ethereum devs officially discuss development and research? Or would this be WP:Scholarship where secondary sources are preferred? HSukePup (talk) 19:04, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

We are not using any crypto sites on wikipedia at the moment. This means coindesk, theblock, binance, etc. None of it. We are also not using blogs, be it from the founder or the company on wikipedia crypto genre. Maybe scholarship would be ok, but needs to be decent stuff, not just students posting their blog posts. We are also not using primary sources, which would be the Ethereum foundation's position on their own scaling initiatives, would be a bit like Microsoft saying 'Windows 98 is new and improved and crashes much less'. Generally we have WP:PROMO and WP:COI problems on these articles so this has been the method to clamp down on it. We dont need to be the most up to date place to get information about cryptocurrency. Of course the whole discussion about scaling between Ethereum, Solana, etc is interesting to me personally, but not something that we are doing at wikipedia for our more mainstream readership. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:47, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

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

from:

who invited reporter Morgen Peck,

to:

who invited reporter Morgen E. Peck,^{[1][2][3][4][5]}

2601:646:203:E7B0:A26B:8CD1:B6E4:B736 (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: The article reflects the usage in the cited source, and the first source you provide also excludes the initial. I could see an argument for change if there were a bunch of other Morgen Pecks out there, but I think this is fine as is. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 19:52, 27 May 2025 (UTC)