Talk:Binance/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Semi-protected edit request on 5 September 2019

Add to note #2 the original whitepaper of the Binance coin (BNB), since this information is missing at the moment. Which does not make sense for a top 10 cryptocurrency. This page has the original and a link to the newer version of the whitepaper: https://www.allcryptowhitepapers.com/binance-coin-whitepaper/. Johnvanrijck (talk) 10:35, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 14:08, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

"Headquarter: Malta" is false

Binance is not regulated by Malta's MFSA or any other Maltese governmental body. They even stated this themselves:

But they also claimed that the exchange had already informed the Maltese authorities that it was no longer seeking a license on the island, or an extension of “grandfathering”—a transitory period whereby license applicants were regulated by the MFSA pending the result of their license application.

https://decrypt.co/20467/why-malta-ended-its-love-affair-with-binance

Can someone with a WP account please correct this?
-- 28 September 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.110.117.203 (talk) 16:36, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

lock

@MER-C: or @David Gerard: we have some repeated edits that appear to me to look like a paid editor MikoloIlas (talk · contribs) (a few suspicious edits of rock bands) over time, with repeated edits of Binance and Changping Zhao (Binance CEO). Removing controversy and then more recently adding promotional info. Article is probably a good candidate for a full auto-confirmed PP. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 17:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

This article has an outdated information regarding Market Capitalization dating back to 2018 in its body that I wanted to replace with a current information, but couldn't do successfully. The outdated information is gone, but the updated one ($1,005,216,607,321) is not appearing or visibleWisdomwiki 40 (talk) 19:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Need to add Binance Partnership with WazirX Exchange Platform:-

Kindly add the below recommended content just below the existing content i.e "In September 2019, the exchange began offering perpetual futures contracts, allowing leverage as high as 125 times the value of the contracts".

In November 2019, Binance flourished its grip in India by acquiring WazirX, a Mumbai based cryptocurrency firm with the motive of promoting and adopting the use of blockchaiin technologies in India.

Ref: Binance acquires Mumbai's bitcoin exchange WazirX. Indiatimes.com. Ref: Breaking: Binance Acquires Indian Crypto Startup WazirX. Inc42.com Ref: Binance Acquires India's Leading Digital Asset Platform WazirX to Launch Multiple Fiat-to-Crypto Gateways. Binance.com Sandeepsri16d (talk) 06:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done: I used a better source and removed some of the puffery, but added the acquisition. Volteer1 (talk) 12:07, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

XRP/Flare Spark drop

Binance.com is accepting the XRP/Flare Spark drop which is solely based on a formula calculated by using its client's XRP deposits and not distributing to its US Customers. This is against the rules of the Flare Drop and it should not profit from such activities. I would like to make mention of this and the class action that is forming. Please advise / comments.112.206.77.192 (talk) 02:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 May 2021

In May 2021, the company was registered in the register of suspects by the US authorities for money laundering.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Run n Fly (talk) 18:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2021

89.80.182.19 (talk) 17:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Binance is not under the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands. Please see below the answer when I tried to file a complain:

Whittaker, Peter <PeterWhittaker@cima.ky> 18:36 (35 minutes ago) to me, ContactInvestments

Good morning Ms. Duisimbekova,

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (the “Authority”) confirms receipt of your email and thanks you for the information provided.

A record of our records confirms that Binance (the “Entity”) is not registered and/or licensed with the Authority.

A further review also confirms that the Entity is not incorporated in the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands.

As such, the Authority Is not in a position to assist with your query.

Should you have additional information which supports your claim that the Entity is registered with the Authority, please do not hesitate to provide said information.

Kind regards,

Peter Whittaker Senior Analyst II | Investments Supervision Division

Cayman Islands Monetary Authority Direct: (345) 244-1684 | Main: (345) 949-7089 Email: PeterWhittaker@cima.ky www.cima.ky | LinkedIn | Facebook

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Run n Fly (talk) 17:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2021

In June 2021, Binance will launch Binance NFT. Wish.big (talk) 13:42, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Rejected. it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - The9Man ^(Talk) 15:35, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2021

Change typo "Bainance" to the correct "Binance" 2603:6081:2342:8A5B:13:281A:E54B:A2CF (talk) 19:30, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2021

Under the heading United Kingdom Move this to the beginning to keep events in chronological order

"In January 2021, the FCA began requiring firms dealing with cryptocurrency to register in order to comply with anti-money laundering rules."

Change "In June 2021, Binance was ordered by the UK's Financial Conduct Authority to stop all regulated activity in the United Kingdom."

To "In June 2021, The FCA issued the following statement "Binance Markets Limited is not permitted to undertake any regulated activity in the UK. This firm is part of a wider Group (Binance Group)." add reference [36] https://www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/consumer-warning-binance-markets-limited-and-binance-group

Add "The statement was not directed at activities carried out by Binance.com but caused confusion in the media with some news sources stating that Binance was banned in the UK." (keep references [34][35] as examples)

Add "Binance issued a clarification on their website in July 2021."

add reference [37] https://www.binance.com/en/support/announcement/1e89bf44e2e041358e6b46dc9bad0b48

Remove "As Binance is not compliant with these rules, it is being forced to cease operations within the coming weeks." M81162 (talk) 15:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: That's a lot of synth from primary sources. We can't use articles as examples of being wrong, we need a reliable source explaining how the media got it wrong. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:23, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2021

The lead reads

Binance is currently under investigation ...

This goes counter to MOS:RELTIME

Absolute specifications of time are preferred to relative constructions using recently, currently, and so on

The wording here should be changed to an absolute specification of time rather than a relative one.

- 2804:14D:5C59:8693:70D1:4AC0:29B7:1213 (talk) 21:09, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2021

Binance is the worlds number one p2p platform ENCYCLOBOYS (talk) 15:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:10, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Launch of $200M investment program for blockchain games

Together with Animoca, Binance launched a $200M investment program for blockchain games in november 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2455:465:9600:6C48:666F:1660:9908 (talk) 18:44, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2022

Gjthakur1 (talk) 08:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. copy/pasting the current article makes it hard to understand what you want changed. Please list only your requested changes Cannolis (talk) 09:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Binance halts withdrawls

Binance has, on a number of occasions, halted withdrawls of various cryptoassets from their centralized exchange. (and did so earlier today for Bitcoin withdrawls halted for several hours).

Am surprised to not see this mentioned in the article, since the practice is controversial and can allow insiders to gain certain advantages in markets, especially when those markets are under stress and rapidly-changing prices are being seen. This article by Decrypt does provide a summary of several of the withdrawl halts over the past several years, and could be a source for improving the article. Binance Halts Bitcoin Withdrawals, 13 June 2022. N2e (talk) 16:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Cofounder He Yi

Cofounder was He Yi 2A02:2455:460:DA00:A8FD:CC22:D42B:7CA0 (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC) 2A02:2455:460:DA00:A8FD:CC22:D42B:7CA0 (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

References

BNB Chain and BNB Coin

BNB has been the third largest cryptocurrency by market cap now, I think the coin its self is notable enough for its own article. This article would talk about the BNB coin and about the BNB Chain.--Treehorn 1991 (talk) 13:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2022

In the BUSD section, the third word, 'BinanceUSD', is spelled incorrectly as "BinaceUSD". 2600:1700:D360:3900:C93E:D91E:DA57:DEC3 (talk) 19:41, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:53, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022

Reference number 26 change citation due to "better source needed" https://cointelegraph.com/news/chinese-supply-chain-innovator-to-develop-blockchain-system-for-smes

Reference number 35 change text and citation due to "better source needed". The text to be changed is "BNB launched June 2017" to "BNB launched July 2017" as the link below mentions https://cointelegraph.com/altcoins-for-beginners/what-is-binance-coin-bnb-and-how-does-it-work

Reference number 37 change citation due to "better source needed" https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/ethereum-binance-smart-chain-blockchain-defi-crypto-074504608.html Κωνσταντίνος Παπ. (talk) 09:12, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done ––FormalDude (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2022

Headquarters Cayman Islands;[1] Mahé, Seychelles[citation needed]

Actually: Ireland. This is true for Europe, Russia, Ukraine etc.

https://www.binance.com/ru/privacy "...a company registered at 6th Floor, South Bank House, Barrow Street, 4 Dublin, Ireland, is the data controller for personal information collected in connection with provision of Binance services in Europe..." Apostate33 (talk) 12:10, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The location of registration is not necessary the location they are headquartered. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:56, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Binance has been quite public that it doesnt consider itself to be HQ at any location and might someday in the future. Inclusion of a location would be WP:UNDUE unless we have a clear notable event that occurs at said location(s), essentially a reason to include it. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Country sub headings

The growing list of country sub-headings under Binance#Legal_status with one sentence in each (normally some sort of enforcement action by a regulator) is growing tedious. We need to find another approach for this, as sub-headings are normally to explore a concept in depth and organize (not just list one sentence). Jtbobwaysf (talk) 22:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Guangying Chen

There's no mention of the co-founder, Guangying Chen, who also owns Binance Switzerland society and CZ attempt to dismiss this data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2803:9800:9094:5D6:704:2100:A90:CDB5 (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2023

It says that Binance is the issuer for BUSD, but in the very next line, it says Paxos is the issuer for BUSD (which is correct). This is contradictory! Binance is NOT the issuer of BUSD, so this line is incorrect. ClassicMain (talk) 15:17, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

 Note:

The Reuters citation (dated August 2022) supporting the first sentence says Binance is the issuer, and does not mention Paxos. The citation at the end of the paragraph, which presumably supports Paxos being the issuer (among other things), is a dead link to what appears to be a Binance-owned website.

The website CoinMarketCap (undated) says that Binance issues the coin in partnership with Paxos, consistent with the article--though I'd be hesitant to use it as a source.

CNN reported in February 2023 that Paxos had been ordered by NY state to stop issuing BUSD, which the company said they would do by February 21, 2023. The final sentence of the section mentions same, citing WSJ and Yahoo! Finance.

TL;DR, the section needs more updates and better citations than I care to do, but perhaps other editors will find these notes helpful. Xan747 (talk) 18:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Notrealname1234 (talk) 20:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2022

Change: Germany In April 2021, the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority in Germany warned that the company risked fines for not releasing an investor prospectus for the stock tokens it has issued.[70]

To: Germany In April 2021, the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority in Germany ("BaFin") warned that a company Binance Deutschland GmbH & Co.KG (now: Bimit Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG) risked fines for not releasing an investor prospectus for the stock tokens it has issued.[70]. The Company has incorporated a German legal entity in May 2022 and applied for a crypto custody licenses (Kryptoverwaherlaubnis) with the BaFin.

Ratio: 1. Link "[70]" is secondary press opinion, no first source of BaFIn announcement. Please compare original BaFin announcement: https://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Verbrauchermitteilung/weitere/2021/meldung_210428_binance_deutschland.html.

2. "Binance Deutschland GmbH & Co.KG" is no Binance group company. Please compare public German commercial register: https://www.unternehmensregister.de/ureg/result.html;jsessionid=E4F147D530E6704EEDA2E1CA7755EEC6.web04-1

3. For the incorporation of the German legal entity please compare public German commercial register: https://www.unternehmensregister.de/ureg/result.html;jsessionid=E4F147D530E6704EEDA2E1CA7755EEC6.web04-1 and application for crypto custody: https://www.btc-echo.de/news/bafin-lizenz-beantragt-darf-binance-bald-in-deutschland-werben-149510/

https://de.cointelegraph.com/news/binance-applies-for-german-crypto-licence BinanceGermany (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: OP-blocked. Lemonaka (talk) 15:48, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Done Conrad0415 (talk) 12:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Updates to infobox

Hello Wikipedia editors. I'm here as an employee and representative to Binance to request changes to the article. As required, I've disclosed my conflict of interest above and on my user page.

First, I have a couple of changes to suggest for the infobox.

1. Add 120 million users globally, per this Forbes article.
2. Add 2022 to the revenue figure to timestamp it, per the citation already used in the article.

If you have questions, I'd like to hear them. I'm learning the ropes here and will have more edits to suggest in the future. Thank you, RBinance (talk) 11:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi, we cannot use the Binance source, as that is WP:PRIMARY and we are not using primary sources on cryptocurrency articles. Are you an employee or related to binance? If yes, please disclose that you are a WP:COI editor. You are still free to make suggestions here on talk, but probably shouldn't edit the article if you have a COI. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 00:11, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Thanks for your response! Yes, I am an employee of Binance. I added the paid contributor banner at the top of this talk page, and declared my COI on my User page. If there's anywhere else I should declare, let me know. I will not make any direct article edits, only suggestions here.

I saw your edit about the company's location and operations. I had planned to make a request about that, as well. Since Binance has never had a headquarters in the traditional sense, I'd suggest changing "Binance was initially based in China, then moved its headquarters to Singapore shortly before the Chinese government imposed regulations on cryptocurrency trading. Binance subsequently left Singapore in late 2021 and after that, had no official company headquarters." to "Binance was launched in China, then moved its operations out of China shortly before the Chinese government imposed regulations on cryptocurrency trading." Let me know what you think. Thanks, RBinance (talk) 08:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

 Unable to implement. The information "120 million users globally" could not be added because the infobox parameter where this information is to reside was not delineated in the request. Please describe which parameter should be altered. Regards,  Spintendo  20:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

@RBinance: my understanding was binance was in Singapore briefly no? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:35, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Binance operated an exchange in Singapore for a period, but that's true of many places. The company has not been based there, as it doesn't have a traditional headquarters. This article from Business Insider India gives a nice overview of the Singapore exchange. Let me know if I can provide further clarification. Thanks, RBinance (talk) 10:04, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Seems like interesting content. Could you please provide a suggestion on text changes? Thanks Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:52, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Hi, sorry for the delay in responding. I'm KB, I've taken over for User:RBinance as the Binance representative on Wikipedia. Here is the Singapore content you requested:

• In 2019, Binance Asia Services (BAS) began operating a local exchange in Singapore, Binance.sg, under a temporary exemption from the country's regulators while its application was under review. Binance.sg eventually withdrew its application and ceased operations by February 13, 2022. The Binance group of companies remained present in the country, focusing on innovation, incubation, and funding programs there.

References

If you have any questions or changes to suggest, please let me know. I have posted a few more suggested updates and copy edits below if you are interested in reviewing. Thank you, KB at Binance (talk) 12:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Requesting edits

Hello, I'm the new representative for Binance on Wikipedia, KB. I have added my COI disclosure to the banner at the top of this page, and, like our previous representative, I will follow the COI editor guidelines and avoid making direct changes to the article. I hope I can collaborate with editors to improve the article with accurate and up-to-date content. There are a few small changes I'd like to suggest:

• Infobox: remove Sakura Exchange from Subsidiaries

• Reason: The regional exchanges are not subsidiaries of the company. It would be more accurate to include Binance Labs, Binance Launchpad, Binance Academy, and Binance Research in this list.

• History: add mention that Binance remains the world's largest crypto exchange as of September 2023. Verified by Euronews.

• Reason: This fact is currently verified as of 2018 in History, and since a lot has happened since then it seems worthwhile to update that timestamp.

• Replace: instances of "stable coin" with "stablecoin" in the subheading 2018–2019: launch of stable coin and security breach and in that subsection.

• Reason: "Stablecoin" is a conventionally used spelling of the word, and is also used in the article. This copy edit will make the article more consistent and clear.

• 2018–2019: launch of stable coin and security breach: change "In November 2019, Binance announced it was acquiring Indian bitcoin exchange WazirX, which became disputed in August 2022 when Binance founder Zhao claimed the deal was never signed." to "...the deal was never completed."

• This is a more accurate description, and matches language used in this TechCrunch article, which I think is better than the current source.

That is all for this request. Let me know if you have questions about these changes, or feel free to implement appropriate changes on my behalf. Thank you, KB at Binance (talk) 12:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I have addressed the 'stable coin' spelling. This term is a lot more complicated and controversial than the current wording explains, so I have added quotation marks to indicate that it is industry jargon.

Your comments about the infobox do not make sense. There is no reason a "regional exchange" cannot also be a subsidiary.

The Euronews source is not about Binance being the "world's largest". It is about "increased scrutiny and regulatory challenges faced by Binance globally".

While the source for the "In November 2019..." change is not ideal, neither is WP:TECHCRUNCH. Since Wikipedia isn't a platform for PR, you should propose a better source.

Grayfell (talk) 19:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Grayfell: Hi, thank you for reviewing and changing the spelling of 'stablecoin.' Regarding other requests, I have some alternative sources that I think will work better:

• For more recent verification of the "world's largest cryptocurrency exchange" claim, there's this 2021 article from The Wall Street Journal. Would that, and that the company is regularly referred to in the mainstream financial press as the largest cryptocurrency exchange, be enough to update the claim to as of 2023? Or at the very least, as of 2021?
• In regards to the WazirX request, this Bloomberg article covered it. If this is an acceptable source, I'd suggest changing:
  • "In November 2019, Binance announced it was acquiring Indian bitcoin exchange WazirX, which became disputed in August 2022 when Binance founder Zhao claimed the deal was never signed."

To

• "In November 2019, Binance announced it was acquiring Indian bitcoin exchange WazirX. The contemplated deal was only to purchase 'certain assets and intellectual property of WazirX'. The completion of the deal is under dispute."

This more closely paraphrases what Bloomberg reported.

Hope this helps. Thanks again, KB at Binance (talk) 09:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Are you seriously asking me if a source from 2021 is usable for a claim as of 2023?

Wikipedia isn't a platform for PR, so your proposal for the WazirX wording is not helpful. If the source is about "a running dispute between the two companies over their relationship" the source should be used to explain that directly. Grayfell (talk) 09:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

KB, let me try to help and interject here. I do like the paid editors on some articles, as they are sometimes willing to do the work we free editors are not. When you want to make a change, please suggest change from A to B. You might even put it inside your sandbox for us to see (with sources). This will help you to learn editing. Next, for sourcing, we are super strict on crypto articles, of which the binance article is included. Please have a look at WP:RSP and only suggest sources that are green on that page. If its not, we are likely to question it. If it is a major print news publication from India (for example) it might be listed on that RSP so you might want to ask us. But if it is a blog, a crypto-source (such as coindesk, theblock, etc) then we wont consider it. I recognize you are here to push PR for binance, and I dont have a problem with that, so please assist us to find quality sources of the things you want to include, this will help to avoid exasperating the editors that have come here to help you to review the proposed changes. Relating to Grayfell's comment, we cover things that have happened in the past, so we would need to see a source actually referring to the event you are discussing. Not everything makes its way into wikipedia due to this, and that is ok. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Thanks for sharing your thoughts here, this is very helpful. I do have quite a few ideas for improving the article, and am happy to work through them with editors to make sure that anything added or changed is neutral and appropriate. With your suggestion, I think my next step will be to mock up the changes I have in mind in my Sandbox.

The rules about what sources can be used also make sense. I do have a question after looking at WP:RSP. I see that Bloomberg has a green checkmark, so wouldn't this article be a more appropriate source for information about the WazirX deal than the InsiderApps article, which I don't see at WP:RSP, that is currently used to support the content about WazirX? I really appreciate you taking the time to help me understand so I can improve my future requests. Also, I see your post about locations below and will respond soon. KB at Binance (talk) 08:04, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the bloomberg source is perfect. Insiderapps would not be an WP:RS on a cryptocurrency article. It appears to be some type of appstore or directory, and has a blog/news section to generate traffic (my guess). Regardless, it wouldnt be mainstream enough to anchor crypto content. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:RSP is not a comprehensive list of all reliable sources, and more importantly, every source must be evaluated in context. To restate my previous comment another way, the goal is to summarize what reliable sources actually say, but the COI-proposed change was not an accurate summary of reliable sources, nor was it a neutral one. Since Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion or advocacy, this proposal doesn't have consensus. Grayfell (talk) 22:07, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

To clarify I wasnt agreeing with the proposed edits, I was only stating that bloomberg is a good source. I too dont agree with this proposed text "certain assets and intellectual property of WazirX" Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the added clarifications! I'll keep all this in mind. KB at Binance (talk) 16:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Location

@KB at Binance: was reading this today at Rolling Stone: "When China began threatening a crackdown on the entire crypto industry just a few months after Binance’s founding, Zhao just took his business to friendlier jurisdictions — first moving the company HQ to Japan and then to Malta. When even Malta’s regulatory requirements reportedly became too stringent for Binance, the company set off on the run once again." We have discussed location before, so I thought we would do that in a section here. I recall I was the one who updated the article to state CZ moved binance from China to Singapore. This seems to contradict that. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Correct, Binance was never located in Singapore. I posted some information in our earlier conversation about the company's history there. Since leaving China, the company has never had a traditional HQ, but I understand that you have to go with what sources on WP:RSP have reported. KB at Binance (talk) 16:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I am aware that Binance currently has the position that it doesnt have a HQ and this position (according to my own WP:OR) seems to be to avoid regulatory oversight in a particular jurisdiction. As you point out we do have to go with the WP:RS, noting that we do not have to only use what is on WP:RSP. I provided RSP as a guide to a new editor like yourself who may be confused as to why we allow one source and we dont allow another. We make some judgement calls on every article. For the cryptocurrency genre we have decided to be ultra strict, as we had a lot of promotional content coming from the crypto-sites such as coindesk, and sometimes the easiest way to deal with it is to ban it. We recognize it may limit the content on many articles in this genre, but we hope that is improves the overall aggregate content. If you have any high quality sources (Rolling Stone is a great one) we can also include that. If you have some video of CZ speaking, say to CNBC, or something like that (even a corporate blog at binance), we can also look at incorporating that position as well. I dont know how we would treat CZ's or Binance's own statements over what Rolling Stone is saying, but we can certainly discuss it. That's what we do here at Wikipedia, we discuss content. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion on article changes

Hi, this is KB from Binance. At Jtbobwaysf's suggestion, I made a copy of the Binance article in my sandbox to preview changes to the article. There's also a discussion on those changes going on at my sandbox Talk page. Interested editors are invited to participate. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 16:34, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Richard Teng article draft

Hi, KB from Binance here. I thought I'd let editors here know that I've submitted Draft:Richard Teng for review at Articles for Creation, in case anyone is interested in taking a look and giving feedback. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

History request

Hello, KB from Binance here. I'd like to make a small request for the History section.

• Update "The company is also seeking registration in more European countries, such as Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Netherlands, Portugal and Austria." to say "At the time, the company was also seeking registration in more European countries, such as Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Netherlands, Portugal and Austria. Binance registered to operate in Spain in July 2022, and in Sweden in January 2023.

• This change will improve the article by replacing future looking language with past tense language for events that have already occurred, and add the outcome for Spain and Sweden.

References

Let me know if you have any questions. Because I have a conflict of interest, I will not directly make changes to the article. Thanks for taking a look. KB at Binance (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 15:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@ARandomName123: Thank you very much! I've posted another request below in case you'd like to have a look. Thanks again, KB at Binance (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Build'N'Build request

Hello, KB from Binance back with another request.

• Change the Binance coin (BNB) section to Build'N'Build, and in that same section change "Binance Coin" to "Build'N'Build".

• As noted in the article and the box with info on the coin, this was rebranded to Build'N'Build.

Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

@KB at Binance: Do you have a date for the rebrand? I feel that this would be helpful for readers to know. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 17:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

And an WP:RS please. We dont do PR things like re-branding unless the RS actually care about it. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Until concerns are addressed. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 21:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

@ARandomName123 and Jtbobwaysf: I appreciate the replies. My thoughts on each below.

• Date of the change: The name was changed in February, 2022 (see Yahoo! Finance in the references below).
• Reliable Sources: As of now, the live article says "BSC later merged with the older Binance Chain and was rebranded into BNB chain." are additional sources needed? I know that the source from Binance itself is not ideal, but what about Yahoo! Finance?

References

I think it would be clearer to readers if we can make the naming consistent. Let me know if you have other questions or thoughts. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 15:31, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@ARandomName123: Thanks so much! I've posted a few more suggestions for this section below, if you're available to review. KB at Binance (talk) 09:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

• I removed the corporate blog post from the article, that is not an WP:RS for this article. We are more strict on cryptocurrency articles due to promotion. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Additional Build'N'Build requests

Hi, I'd like to make a couple more suggestions for the Build'N'Build section of this article. As a reminder, I work for Binance, so I do not make direct changes.

• After the first sentence in this section, add "BUSD was launched in partnership with the company Paxos."

• This is to add clarity and bring it inline with the section on BUSD, so both confirm the same thing.

• Change "It has 21 approved validators." to "BNB had 44 validators as of October 2022."

• This updates the figure, adds a timestamp so readers will know when the information was accurate, and adds Reuters as a source.

• Change "As of 2021, Binance Coin was the cryptocurrency with the third highest market capitalization." to "As of 2021, Build'n'Build was the cryptocurrency with the third highest market capitalization."

• To keep naming consistent per previous discussion.

• In the final sentence, change "Binance Smart Chain" to "BNB Smart Chain"

• To keep naming consistent per previous discussion.

References

Please let me know if you have questions, I am happy to discuss these suggestions. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 09:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

• I dont think the term Build'n'Build is broadly used in the sources and we should continue to use BNB as it is much more prevent. Seems like a PR attempt to widely use this new and relatively unheard of term. In fact who cares what BNB means, it might be changed again to mean something in the future. It might be due in some sort of history section, eg 'from these years BNB meant x and since another year it means Build'n'Build.' I changed the section to the name BNB. We can see that this BNB chain has undergone multiple re-brands, this fxempire source says it was earlier called Binance coin and now there is a PR push to assert that BNB is not binance, it is BuildNBuild. For me big whatever, we normally dont support this type of PR posturing. Its due to include in the article the posturing, but lets not give excessive weight to it. BNB is in itself a notable term. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: I appreciate the response, and understand your concern. My thinking was that it might confuse readers to use "Binance coin" in the article after it says its name was changed. Here's another idea that I think would address your concerns, the potential confusion, and make sense for the section's flow:

• Move "In February 2022, BSC merged with the older Binance Chain and was rebranded into Build'N'Build (BNB)." to the bottom of the paragraph, which would put it in chronological order.

Also curious to hear if you have thoughts on the other parts of this request? On second glance, I wonder if it would make sense to remove mention of BUSD from this section, since it's redundant to the BUSD section?

Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 07:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there are difference between BSC and BNB? BSC was Binance Smart Chain before right? And BNB was what? Binance coin or was it Binance Bi (币)? Lot of jargon here, indeed might be good to clean it up. Did these two coins merge BSC and BNB? Was there ever a separately traded BSC token? Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Good questions, and I agree that there's a lot of jargon and technical detail here. I'll try my hand at a broader rewrite and cleanup and flag you when I have something to share. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 09:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Hi, I've come up with the following suggestion for rewriting the BNB section. I've tried to cut back on jargon and reduce how many acronyms are flying around. You asked about the difference between BNB and BSC, the short answer is that BNB has always been the acronym for the token (Binance Coin, not Build'N'Build) and BSC was the acronym for Binance Smart Chain, which merged with Binance Chain when everything was renamed in 2022. I couldn't find anything that looked like a reliable source that went into that much depth, so I kept it simple and didn't mention the two chains merging, and removed protocols and the Ethereum virtual machine. Lastly, I started the section off with a summary sentence, which I thought made sense as a setup before launching into the history.

Build'N'Build (BNB) is a digital asset that's used as a utility token on the BNB chain. It was originally called Binance Coin when it was launched in July 2017, for users to pay fees on the company's platform. By 2021, Binance Coin had the third highest market capitalization among cryptocurrencies. The token was initially on the Ethereum network, then moved to Binance Smart Chain when it was released in September 2020. In February 2022, the company changed the token's name to Build'N'Build. At that time, Binance Smart Chain was also renamed to BNB Chain. BNB Chain had previously been criticized for being overly centralized, which had led to several exploits on the network. BNB had 44 validators as of October 2022.

References

Happy to hear feedback and ideas for improvement. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 07:45, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

• BUSD partnership: Not done for now I'm a bit confused as to why this bears mention in the section on BNB?
• Validator count:  Already done
• Market capitalization:  Partly done changed to BNB per above.
• BNB Smart Chain:  Done I'm less sure about this. Quite a few sources seem to be using the new name. Non-insignificant amount don't though.

Snowmanonahoe (talk · contribs · typos) 16:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Can you please help to clarify more (if possible) is there still a Binance Coin and/or Binance Smart Chain? Have these been merged? It sounds like the coin was running on ethereum and then moved to smart chain? Then today what is going on? Is there still a coin and/or smart chain? Or are they now the same thing (BuildNBuild)? Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:54, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Happy to answer these questions.

• Is there still a Binance Coin and/or Binance Smart Chain? Have these been merged?
  • Binance Coin was fully rebranded to Build'N'Build (BNB), and the Binance Smart Chain was merged with the Binance Chain to become BNB Chain. I could not find a RS to verify that the two chains merged.
• It sounds like the coin was running on ethereum and then moved to smart chain?
  • Correct, the coin moved from Ethereum to the Binance Smart Chain (now part of BNB Chain). I have that in the draft above, but let me know if you think I can make it clearer. Here's what it says right now: "The token was initially on the Ethereum network, then moved when Binance released the Binance Smart Chain[3] in September 2020.[4]"
• Then today what is going on? Is there still a coin and/or smart chain? Or are they now the same thing (BuildNBuild)?
  • Today, there are two things. BNB Chain is the network, and Build'N'Build the coin (more commonly referred to as simply BNB) is the network's utility token and native currency.

Does that all make sense? I know it's a bit confusing with the shared name. The sources that go into detail are all cryptocurrency news outlets, so I can show you those if it will help clarify, but didn't want to suggest them.

Thanks! KB at Binance (talk) 10:19, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

• I made a change above to cleanup one sentence, to try to improve the syntax. Also generally we prefer not to have sources in the middle of sentences. People do it, but it is not suggested. I suspect the reason for the chain renaming is PR purposes, not anything related to decentralization. So that sentence should probably be removed unless we have strong sources for that. Comments? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC) I also removed the decentralization claim, as it sounded PR-wise. I think I am ok with it the way it is. If you are ok with it, feel free to implement it on the mainspace. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: This makes sense, I see why mentioning the decentralization doesn't fit here with the sources we have to work with. I have made the change as you approved, please let me know if anything doesn't look right. Thanks again for all of your feedback, KB at Binance (talk) 06:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Introduction balance

Hi, KB at Binance here. I have a request for the introduction of this article. I noticed that the introduction has had several lawsuits added to it, some of which are also covered in the article body and the most recent of which is not. From my reading of WP:LEAD, I think the introduction has become unbalanced. I propose the following changes:

• Replace paragraphs two and three, which are all content that is also covered in the article body, with the following summary of Binance's legal history:

Binance has been the subject of lawsuits and challenges from regulatory authorities throughout its operating area. As a result, Binance has been banned from operating or ordered to cease operations in some countries, and has been issued fines. It has been alleged that Binance could be used as a funding mechanism for terrorist groups. In November 2023, the company pleaded guilty in a U.S. federal court to money laundering, unlicensed money transmitting, and sanctions violations.

• Move paragraph four into History. This content is only covered in the introduction at this time, and it is summarized in the suggested content above.

I am interested in hearing thoughts from other editors on these changes, and any ideas for improving the introduction's balance. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 08:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

The lead always summarizes and doesnt introduce content that is not in the article body. So yes, if it meets this criteria should be moved to the body. I just moved those two issues out of the lead and into the body. Are they covered already in the body? Yes, we should just summarize in the lead, your summary looks fine to me. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Okay great! Appreciate you starting the move process. There are now two paragraphs that cover the November 2023 plea in 2020–2023: acquisitions and investments what do you think of removing one of those? As for the paragraph still in the introduction, yes it is all covered elsewhere in the article. The US and UK cases are both covered in their respective subsections of Legal Status, and the sentence about Russia is mentioned in the seventh paragraph of 2020–2023: acquisitions and investments. Hope that helps, happy to answer other questions. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

From my position putting every legal case in the lead is undue, so I would also be ok to summarize the lead. Binance has faced regulatory issues in almost every venue, so particular bans and chases are not due the lead in my opinion. I suppose if CZ is sentenced to due prison time, that might change, but otherwise not so much. Every crypto exchange that I know of has or is facing regulatory issues in the US particularly, so I dont see what is encyclopedic here. You can go ahead and merge those two paragraphs in the body and just ping me and I will a look at it when you are done. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:35, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: We're in agreement on how content should be summarized. I appreciate your approval of the changes, but I wonder if you'd implement them? The BNB changes seemed pretty non-controversial, but since this deals with content about legal matters, I feel like with my COI it's best if I stay completely hands-off with making the change. I could prepare markup for you, if that's helpful? Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 14:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, could you please prepare a proposed change? Sometimes I think a diff is an easy way to do that, such as making a change on the article (all at once in one edit) and then immediately self reverting that. I often do that when I am going to propose an RFC on something, so that I can post the diff on the talk page. Anyhow, if you are not comfortable to do that as well, you can just put it here. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Sure thing. I found Template:Text diff and it seems pretty perfect for this. See the diffs in the collapse box below:

Diffs

Introduction − In 2021, Binance was put under investigation by both the [[United States Department of Justice]] and [[Internal Revenue Service]] on allegations of [[money laundering]] and tax offenses. The UK's [[Financial Conduct Authority]] ordered Binance to stop all regulated activity in the United Kingdom in June 2021. That same year, Binance shared client data, including names and addresses, with the Russian government. + Binance has been the subject of lawsuits and challenges from regulatory authorities throughout its operating area. As a result, Binance has been banned from operating or ordered to cease operations in some countries, and has been issued fines. It has been alleged that Binance could be used as a funding mechanism for terrorist groups. In November 2023, the company pleaded guilty in a U.S. federal court to money laundering, unlicensed money transmitting, and sanctions violations. Notes: All of the removed text is covered elsewhere in the article, as discussed here. 2020–2023: acquisitions and investments − In July 2023, several senior executives resigned from the company. ''The Wall Street Journal'' reported that Binance had cut its global workforce by as many as 1,000 staff. CNBC reported that the number of staff cuts could total 3,000 by the end of 2023. Zhao didn't deny layoffs were occurring but claimed both the reported numbers and the reasons for the senior executive departures weren't accurate. In June 2023 Binance had 790 million US dollars in outflows after the SEC announced its lawsuit and Forbes reported that the company had 120 million users globally. On November 21, 2023, US authorities convicted Binance on multiple charges—including violations of the Bank Secrecy Act and vast money laundering schemes. As part of the plea deal, Changpeng Zhao stepped down as CEO with a $50 million fine. The position is succeeded by Richard Teng and will pay $4 billion in fines. On November 21, 2023, Binance pleaded guilty to federal charges in the U.S., admitting that it engaged in money laundering, unlicensed money transmitting, and sanctions violations; and has agreed to pay over $4 billion in fines. + In July 2023, several senior executives resigned from the company. ''The Wall Street Journal'' reported that Binance had cut its global workforce by as many as 1,000 staff. CNBC reported that the number of staff cuts could total 3,000 by the end of 2023. Zhao didn't deny layoffs were occurring but claimed both the reported numbers and the reasons for the senior executive departures weren't accurate. In June 2023 Binance had 790 million US dollars in outflows after the SEC announced its lawsuit and Forbes reported that the company had 120 million users globally. On November 21, 2023, US authorities convicted Binance on multiple charges—including violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, money laundering schemes, unlicensed money transmitting, and sanctions violations. As part of the plea deal, the company agreed to pay $4 billion in fines, and Changpeng Zhao stepped down as CEO with a $50 million fine. Zhao was succeeded by [[Richard Teng]]. Notes: The two paragraphs were pretty close, with some minor differences, so I consolidated the two together.

References
References

Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 11:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Looks perfect, please implement the change on the mainspace. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Thanks for reviewing, I have implemented the changes. Would you mind taking a quick look to make sure it's all good and then closing this request? KB at Binance (talk) 08:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with the changes made. I have removed the COI template, as I think that is how I close this request. If not, please let me know. I also wanted to note that the bot did show up after your edit and deal with some references that you (i'm assuming inadvertently) deleted. Next time, please have a look and be sure the references you are are deleting are not used other places in the article. Thank you and happy editing! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: Appreciate it, and thanks for the reminder about the sources. For other requests, the template has been changed to answered, so I added the template back on and marked it completed. Thanks so much for the time and reviews! KB at Binance (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Perfect, I see you added "|ans=y". Awesome, now i know how to close those. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 19:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf: I did, thank you for double-checking the changes. I opened a new request below and am always interested in hearing your thoughts. KB at Binance (talk) 13:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

In the future, please do not make these edits yourself, even with "permission". Claiming WP:LOCALCONSENSUS for the addition of naked whitewashing and PR is inappropriate, and this was a good demonstration of why COI editing is frowned upon and causes so much damage to Wikipedia. It also demonstrates how COI editing causes hassles and inconvenience to good-faith editors who have to spend time cleaning up this kind of garbage. Grayfell (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@Grayfell: I explicitly asked the COI editor to implement the changes. Is that a violation of policy? If it is, please let me know so I wont do it again. Sometimes these COI editors are helpful in making changes, happy to have more eyes on this (eg you). At least this editor has identified themselves as a COI editor and is following the process, for me that is good. Do you have objection to some specific edits? Thanks Jtbobwaysf (talk) 11:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I think I made my objections perfectly clear. The entire thing reads more like PR whitewashing than a neutral enccylopedia. Wikipedia is not a platform for this, as everyone here hopefully already knows. Yes, the lead should be a summary, but what does and does not belong in such a summary should not be determined by how unflattering it is to the company itself. Grayfell (talk) 19:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

@Grayfell: You have made your objections clear but not the policy that you appear to allege I violated. I do not support whitewashing on this article and have objected to some of the changes proposed, but when I saw no issues, asked the editor to implement themself out of expediency and normally the editor has pinged me to let me know they have done so and I have taken a look. This is the largest global exchange and aside from highlighting the legal issues, it still is the largest in the space. As far as I have read (my OR) nearly every exchange has faced legal issues, so controversy is nothing novel. Please change whatever you feel has been whitewashed. Regardless, KB at Binance (talk · contribs) please wait for others to implement your suggested changes going forward. Apologies for any confusion I may have caused. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

As Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure makes clear, Wikipedia and Wikimedia takes paid editing very seriously. This is in part because it has caused so much damage to the project in the past (see Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for just a tiny sample of these problems). Per Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#Conflict of interest guideline (and other polices), paid editors are strongly discouraged from from directly editing affected articles. There are so, so, so many reasons for this. I do not accept that expediency is a valid excuse. Grayfell (talk) 20:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I see Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#Conflict of interest guideline and the COI editor (KB) has to my knowledge only put the content only after discussing on this talk page, with my explicit approval, and generally I have subsequently reviewed. However, as noted in my previous message I wont ask this editor (nor any other COI editor) to make the edits themself anymore after approval on the talk page. I suggest KB also ping you in the future when they are waiting for content approval/comments/additions so that you may assist as well. Would that be ok with you? Two eyes are always better than one. Again apologies for any confusion I may have caused. I would also like to again reiterate that I do not support whitewashing and have not participated in that here. You might disagree with the edits themselves, and if that is the case please raise those and we can discuss. I think there is plenty of discussion on this talk page already about the edits (since the COI editor is involved) and it should be quite clear what was edited and for what reason. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

@Jtbobwaysf and Grayfell: I'll be sure to let reviewing editors implement approved changes to avoid any confusion, and will continue to use the edit request queue and am happy to discuss my proposed changes here on the Talk page. Thanks, KB at Binance (talk) 08:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)