Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyber Security Awareness

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) b uidhe 23:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cyber Security Awareness

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I could be wayyyy off base but this seems to be more of an Essay then an encyclopedia article. I'm not sure how this could be salvaged. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Maybe try reading it? It's reasonably well sourced (it's lacking content more than sourcing) and while it's no more than a stub at present (that's why it's labelled "stub"), the topic is good. As cyber security gets better by engineering, the attacks focus more on the human targets: so educating those targets and increasing their awareness is the next step for improvement, hence this article and the idea of awareness as being distinct from and supplemental to inbuilt security itself. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:20, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did and that's why I said it read more like an essay. I'm open to being wrong here too I'm just saying what I got when I read it. If it ends up being a WP:SNOW keep you'll get a full apology from me. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When did you read it? In the two whole minutes between it going live and you Afding it? Was that with the supporting references or without? I couldn't even read WP:BEFORE in that time. Crying "AGF" afterwards is no excuse. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dude I read 300 plus words per minute...chill. I'm sorry that I made a decision you didn't like, please accept it was done in good faith. We can let others decide too, I am ok with that. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this article is suitable for Wikipedia, the subject is notable and it's pretty well sourced, but it does need expanding. I don't really feel like it reads like an essay, except maybe in the lead a little, but nothing which can't be fixed. Golem08 (talk) 12:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:11, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:11, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:25, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. fixable (and I don't quite see why it needed yo be relisted. Nom+ 2k = K. DGG ( talk ) 18:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.