Talk:Mark Karpelès

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Request for general revision and restore version 1252696654

[edit]

I am writing to address a recent edit dispute regarding the Mark Karpeles article. I made multiple revisions (Latest revision: 1252696654) that were reverted by @Notwally under the misleading edit summary "Rv sock edits." After a checkuser review, it was confirmed that I am not a sockpuppet, making the reason for the revert baseless.

Quote Checkuser: "Regarding Amber hurt, lots of people are into crypto. I'm not seeing enough in the editing histories to block on with nothing more than "possible" from CU." by @RoySmith

I strongly believe that my version of the article offers a more accurate and balanced version of Karpeles' career and legal proceedings for the following reasons:

1.     Improved Structure and Readability: My version organizes the article more effectively by clearly separating Karpeles' roles at Tibanne, the Bitcoin Foundation, and Mt. Gox. This structure helps readers better understand the timeline of events and his involvement in different ventures.

2.     Accurate Legal Proceedings: My version presents the legal proceedings more clearly, emphasizing the difference between the charges Karpeles faced and the final outcomes. This provides a balanced view without leaning into sensationalism.

3.    NPOV: My version avoids unnecessary repetition of legal charges and negative framing, while still giving an accurate account of the facts. In contrast, @Notwally's version appears to focus heavily on negative events, leading to a potentially biased presentation.

I kindly request a comparison of both versions and potential changes, as I can no longer edit the article—it was restricted to extended confirmed users. If agreed, please restore version 1252696654 Amber hurt (talk) 07:10, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason to be whitewashing the article. The arrests and convictions of the article subject are the most notable aspect of his career and are discussed by every recent article about him I have seen published by high quality sources. The lead includes the most significant aspects of the article. Changes to remove this information, the same changes that numerous sockpuppets have attempted, are not appropriate. As for the creation of unnecessary subsections, see WP:OVERSECTION. – notwally (talk) 19:04, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, noting that the checkuser never confirmed Amber hurt is not a sockpuppet account of Lustigermutiger21. The checkuser result was "possible". See investigation: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lustigermutiger21. – notwally (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

lying on bank documents?

[edit]

Whats the source for the lying?

,,Despite its growth, Mt. Gox faced growing operational, security, and financial challenges, including having $5 million seized from its accounts by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2013 for allegedly lying on bank documents."

Edited by a guy who edits odd to put this article into negative POV. 2001:8F8:1F28:9780:4490:6788:FC8A:98D6 (talk) 18:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Book section

[edit]


I suggest to add a book section:

Books

Cryptocurrency 3.0. - Kodansha (講談社) (May 30, 2019). - C. 226. - ISBN 978-4065150382[1][2]

Simple reason: He wrote a book and there are numerous reliable sources backing it.

86.98.213.4 (talk) 10:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Question: Can you please show evidence that these sources are reliable for Wikipedia? Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:38, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "ビットコインの創始者「サトシ・ナカモト」という虚像の正体（上田 岳弘,マルク カルプレス） @moneygendai". マネー現代 (in Japanese). 2019-07-12. Retrieved 2024-10-21.
  2. ^ "異才カルプレス 「仮想通貨3.0」で再び革命！". FRIDAYデジタル. 2019-07-01. Retrieved 2024-10-21.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AI-generated frog portrait

[edit]
File:VP.net Mark Karpelles.png
  • [1] - Added photo
  • [2] - Undid revision 1303945175 by TansoShoshen (talk): WP:AIIMGBLP / WP:AIGI "AI-generated images should not be used to depict subjects of BLPs"
  • [3] - Marginal cases (such as major AI enhancement or where an AI-generated image of a living person is itself notable) are subject to case-by-case consensus."

Bringing this to talk, rather than continuing in edit summaries, due to the possibility that this article is subject to 1RR. It does not seem to me that this image is a major AI enhancement or itself notable, nor is it clear that there exists consensus for exceptional inclusion in this specific case. @TansoShoshen: Could you please explain why this image is appropriate to exempt from both the policy against images wholly generated by AI being used in mainspace and also the policy against AI-generated images being used to depict subjects of BLPs? Thanks. DefaultFree (talk) 02:35, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DefaultFree
There functionally exists no current free depictions of the subject available. It's a depiction of the subject used by a company he works at. I'd argue that AI-generated images should be used when the subject is known to use them (i.e. not generated for the sake of having a photo in an article).
By no means did I present this as a work by my own prompting nor did I present this as a realistic depiction of the subject, which I would argue is the basis to why the policy exists. For an encyclopedia, you don't want to use AI-generated imagery that is either scrapes from copywritten sources or just makes things up. This photo is none of that, it's an abstract illustration (similar to a profile photo) that is used by the subject. TansoShoshen (talk) 03:33, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanation. I've notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject AI Cleanup of this discussion, to hopefully solicit input from additional uninvolved editors so that a consensus on this particular case can be determined. DefaultFree (talk) 04:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here from the AI cleanup crew. I changed the caption as what was there was a misrepresentation. As for whether the image should be included at all, that depends on how notable the image is. I'm leaning towards no, considering that this image appears to only be used on one website, and this guy doesn't appear to actually use the image himself in his social media/etc. -- LWG talk 04:49, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also here from that notification – I believe it really depends on whether the image is used by the subject, and how much. Like LWG points out, it doesn't seem to be used on his social media (@MagicalTux on X, MagicalTux on GitHub) or on https://magicaltux.net (which, looking at archive.org, has been inaccessible since way before vp.net has been a thing). I don't think an avatar only used by a company he is a part of, in the theme of that company's other avatars, is a good enough representation for a BLP's infobox. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 12:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also here from the WikiProject. The argument that "no free image is available" is a pretty poor one to use to argue in favor of an AI-generated image because the image use policy states that Community members have largely rejected making exceptions merely because an image lacks obvious errors, or because no free non-AI-generated images are available. (emphasis added) This image should only be used if the subject uses it, and based on the comments above, he does not appear to use this image himself. It would be better to find a suitable non-free image instead. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding that last point, we shouldn't do that either. WP:FREER states, as a condition disallowing fair use of non-free images, that the replacement image does not need to exist; it is sufficient that it could be created – for example, in most cases, a photograph of a living person can be taken and released under a free licence. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]