Deutsch한국어 日本語中文EspañolFrançaisՀայերենNederlandsРусскийItalianoPortuguêsTürkçe
Portfolio TrackerSwapBuy CryptoCryptocurrenciesPricingWalletNewsEarnBlogNFTWidgetsCoinStats MidasDeFi Portfolio Tracker24h ReportPress KitAPI Docs

As per a debate on Wikipedia, NFTs can't be categorized as an 'art’ because...

2y ago
bullish:

2

bearish:

0

image

Going in 2022, Non fungible tokens (NFTs) have become a household name now. These so-called "digital collectibles" experienced a meteoric rise in 2021.

To summarize, NFTs have taken the world by storm these past few years. It is through NFTs, digital artists are getting the recognition they deserved. However, people seem to be divided when it comes to considering it as an 'art.' Consider this- What if Wikipedia categorizes NFT as 'non-art'. In that case, it would be nothing less of a tragedy. Well, this was indeed the scenario in a recent tussle on the social media platform.

Declaration of an Art Emergency

As per an ongoing debate on Wikipedia, the potential to officially categorize NFTs as ‘not art’ is currently trending at the moment. The free user-generated encyclopedia voted against classifying NFTs as a form of art. Much of the discussion centered on whether an NFT represented the art. Or, if it was simply a token that was separate from the underlying art. Some felt that there was a lack of reliable information to conclude from.

According to this debate, the situation stood at the following- Six votes opposing the inclusion of NFT sales as art. And, zero votes in favor of including NFT sales as art. Needless to say, this could create havoc given Wikipedia's reach across the globe.

It all started on the platform at the end of December. In fact, some of these sales fetched more than $90 million. Nonetheless, on 12 January, a consensus was made to remove sales of prominent pieces. Such as Pak’s NFT collection that fetched $91 million and Beeple’s $69 million NFT from the top art sales list, and re-open the discussion at a later date.

One of the Gemini intern executives with Twitter handle, 'Duncan Cock Foster' in a series of tweets touched on all these aspects. He even shed light on the gravity of this situation in a tweet that read as:

https://twitter.com/DCCockFoster/status/1481353478001803267

NFT proponents such as Nifty Gateway co-founder Griffin Cock Foster reiterating the same narrative asserted,

"This is pretty messed up to see - Wikipedia mods are trying to say that *no* NFT can be art - as in, if its an NFT, it can’t be classified as art. Not all NFTs are art - its a flexible medium after all - but many are 100% art. Take action and spread the word!"

Any escape route(s)? 

According to NFT collector Duncan Cock Foster, the NFT community needs to combine and showcase its sheer potential.

https://twitter.com/DCCockFoster/status/1481353480593891329

In addition to this, Everipedia, a decentralized Web3 equivalent of Wikipedia took advantage of this situation. It replied to the platform by comparing its approach to NFTs and art:

https://twitter.com/Everipedia/status/1481398391816933376?s=20

Nonetheless, it wasn't the first dance for Wikipedia. It has had issues with reporting crypto-related information. Anti-crypto activist and senior Wikipedia editor David Gerard took the center stage then. He removed an entry relating to the Australian blockchain software firm Power Ledger.

The post As per a debate on Wikipedia, NFTs can't be categorized as an 'art’ because... appeared first on AMBCrypto.

2y ago
bullish:

2

bearish:

0

Manage all your crypto, NFT and DeFi from one place

Securely connect the portfolio you’re using to start.