Template:Did you know nominations/Quadriga Fintech Solutions

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Quadriga Fintech Solutions

(

)

... that up to 190 million dollars in cryptocurrencies owed to 115,000 customers cannot be accessed, since the only person with the password, the founder of Quadriga, had died unexpectedly ? Source: "Canada's largest cryptocurrency exchange Quadriga is due in court Tuesday as it seeks creditor protection in the wake of the sudden death of its founder and chief executive in December and missing cryptocurrency worth roughly $190-million." (and CTV News, "Quadriga has 363,000 registered users and owes a total of C$250 million to 115,000 affected users, according to an affidavit filed by Cotten's widow Jennifer Robertson on behalf of the company." The Hindu

- ALT1: ... that up to 190 million dollars in cryptocurrencies, owed to 115,000 customers cannot be accessed, due to the unexpected death of the founder of Quadriga, as he was the only person knowing the password ?

- - ALT2: ... that up to 190 million dollars in cryptocurrencies owed to 115,000 customers cannot be accessed, as the founder of Quadriga, the only person knowing the password had unexpectedly died ?

Reviewed: (Exempted with only 2 DYKs )

5x expanded by Џ (talk) and DBigXray (talk). Nominated by DBigXray (talk) at 14:19, 6 February 2019 (UTC).

Ref says it's CDN$250m - the $190m is USD. Otherwise, apposite and timely - David Gerard (talk) 12:59, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
On a purely grammatical level - let's please change "suddenly died" to "died unexpectedly". Everybody who dies does so "suddenly" (there might be arguments on whether the borderline between life and death is 1 second or 15 minutes, but the transition is certainly sudden). But one of the major reasons this death is notable is that it was so unexpected.

My main objection, however, is that the death is still not certain. The WSJ, New York Times say things like "was reported to have died". The Washington Post, The Hindu and others report that Cotten died in one sentence, and then give the source of that info in the next. Some of the earlier stories from less reliable source don't make a point of the "reported" or attribution but currently the best sources do. @Smartse: disagrees with me on this and I respect his opinion (without agreeing with it) - he thinks it's an insinuation to include "reported" (so a BLP matter), I think the conservative approach in this very bizarre matter is "reported". @David Gerard: The $190 is being reported for two different ways (total invested or amount missing), as USD and CAD, in different sources. I can't sort it out. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 15:11, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Done. [1] per this source i have changed the hook to USD instead of CDN. Smallbones or David Gerard kindly mark the DYK as approved if no other concerns. DBig Xrayᗙ 17:50, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

@Smallbones: In a personal capacity yes, it does seem a bit odd, but as I noted in an edit summary before, outside of the crypto sources, they raise the possibility of him having faked his own death, but all say he is dead. I can't read the WSJ but the NYT says it was reported by the company but then elsewhere discusses the death without expressing any doubt. At the moment, the rumours are just that and we should be cautious of amplifying them further. SmartSE (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

@DBigXray: I'm probably too invested in the article (thank goodness, not in the company) to give a fair judgement on the DYK, but I'd love to see this on the front page. @Smartse: the treatment of the "questions" or "rumors" in the reliable press hasn't been exactly bold, but it looks to me like they are saying, in effect, "be careful here". It's a judgement call what emphasis we put in the article. But we can agree to disagree. I won't push it except to say: Remind me whenever this gets settled - maybe in 6 or 12 months - and then I'll either say "you were right" or "I told you so!" Smallbones_(smalltalk) 04:09, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- like, I'm doing a lot of crypto punditry in the press about this (as an Expert who answers his phone), and am not claiming he faked his death on the record, even though everything about the Quadriga collapse is suspicious as hell. I tend to phrase it "there are rumours, but ..." So I see nothing wrong with sticking to the official story per refs for now - David Gerard (talk) 09:04, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

ALT1 is my favourite, but any of these are fine - David Gerard (talk) 09:08, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks David Gerard, for the review. Yes, I agree with your view since I believe that we should take the WP:Mainstream approach taken by official and media refs, rather than the rumours. DBig Xrayᗙ 10:04, 8 February 2019 (UTC)