Talk:N26

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Apple Pay mit einer Mastercard von N26.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

March 2019 controversy

I've brought this line with the sources - unfortunately it is all in German, so some of the editors here may not be able to verify it for themselves. An IP user added additional information which is in my view not supported by the sources given. All the articles basically deal with one specific case, and lawyers are quoted that say "more cases exist". Concerns about the fast growth impacting customer growth were raised by the press, not N26 itself. They basically say the problem is no more widespread than elsewhere, and all problems with their support were temporary.

None of the press articles mentioned the the former CPO. While I assume that it is true that he left, I found no source who connected that event with the current reports, so we cannot make that connection here.

There seems to be complaints on Twitter, but a Twitter account that collects unverified customer complaints does not count as a WP:Reliable Source. Averell (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 3 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

---

• N26 (bank) → N26
• N26 → N26 (disambiguation)

– this international bank is better recognised than other local subjects. RZuo (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Comment. How so? Steel1943 (talk) 07:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Updated. Steel1943 (talk) 15:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC) )

This is a bank operating in Europe and USA. Just like Barclays (not Barclays (bank)), ICBC and so on.

Look at last three years' data.--RZuo (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support. The bank does appear to be the primary topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:43, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tagged for promotional content.

The Product section is almost 100% sourced from their website. Clearly they are trying to optimize for AI but Wikipedia is not the place for it. There are also some questionable sources but I can't determine they reliability. For example TechCrunch is referenced 9 times and all of those articles are written by the same author. Maliwalii (talk) 00:35, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

I was also not sure if it should be all removed. I haven't made such (drastic) changes and wanted to discuss first.

(I meant *their reliability, apologies) Maliwalii (talk) 00:41, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

understandable and youre totally right, its fuuuuullll of promo content. personally, i love to gut promotional articles, so id be happy to do it- but would you like to give it a shot since you seem to have an idea of what needs done? if youd want, you can also draft any changes here or in your user space and i can proofread, but thats absolutley not essential. i just understand the instinct to get guidance when youre starting out.

three things that i always think about when im debating an edit are wp:bebold, Wikipedia:Can't break it, and Wikipedia:Consensus#Through editing- specifically where it says "An edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed or reverted." basically meaning. if someone has a problem with your best judgment, its on them to say it. assuming youre trying to make the encyclopedia better (which you clearly are), you are explicitly just allowed to assume your edits are ok until someone tells you otherwise. Jackjd0 (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

I need to think a bit more on it but I'm willing to try it myself! What I'm wondering is, should a bank (or company at all) have a product section if their product isn't something revolutionary. I believe such info should be (and probably is) in articlels like Bank or Neobank Maliwalii (talk) 01:38, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

in a quick skim, the only things that pop out at me as possibly encyclopedic are that it provides service in multiple countries and multiple languages. but if you want to cut even that out or move it to a diff section, that would be fine. but yeah, ill keep an eye for the ping. if you have any questions feel free to ping me here or pop onto my talk page Jackjd0 (talk) 01:44, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

I'll edit myself what I know I'm sure of and tag you in drafts if I really am not sure and need any help. Thank you for the shared resources, very helpful!! Maliwalii (talk) 01:41, 31 July 2026 (UTC)