Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Security theater

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 23:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Security theater

Neologism, not notable, conspiracy-cruft Edogy 03:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete. As non-notable neologism. Cedars 04:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Per ghit count: ^{[Check Google hits]}. Plenty of content here, and it seems the term is in use. May be rooted in conspiracy theories, but that's not a reason to delete. (|-- UlTiMuS 04:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. Notable expression. Gained milage beyond Mr Schneier. I've even used it in conversation over lunch. --Billpg 09:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable due to broad dispersal in the blog world and references in the press [1] [2] [3] -- not always by or in connection with Schneier. [4] [5] Note especially Tucker Carlson using it recently on his show. [6] Nothing in particular to do with conspiracy theories, either. (The current article is largely OR, though.) —Celithemis 10:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per WP:V, WP:OR. Looks like neologism to me... Valrith 12:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep for the reasons given above. The OR issues should be able to be dealt with short of deleting the page. This term seems well established in the discourse of security professionals and the general public. As an aside, dismissing well-thought criticism of security rules from experts in the field as "conspiracy-cruft" does a shameful disservice to the public discourse. wac(talk contrib) 16:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It's been used notably beyond its creator. There may be WP:V and WP:OR at work, but it's fixable. SliceNYC 17:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I see this term all the time in the blogosphere. jdb ❋ (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• keep per above Spearhead 21:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
• keep it's an intresting concept we should be aware of —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.193.237.108 (talk • contribs).
• Strong Keep per Celithemis' comment --Mperry 02:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I also see this term regularly Alanhwiki 05:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. A term is not non-notable simply because it is new. The term "security theater" has seen rapid acceptance by the security community since its inception by Bruce Schneier, and is a convenient and concise way to explain an increasingly important concept. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by StephenFalken (talk • contribs).
• Keep. Labelling this as having anything to do with "conspiracy theories" in an attempt to weaken it is foolish. The rapid take-up of the term suggests it is a helpful tool to have when discussing security matters. Rufous 15:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. As a computer security professional, I find the term decidedly useful. --Anonymous —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.219.48.118 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Information is both not original research and is verifiable by the references give. The term "Security Theater" may often be used in biased articles but the entry given here is neutral. 17:00, 28 August (UTC)
• Keep per Celithemis and wac. --Aristotle 17:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• STRONG KEEP Perfect term. Who ever put this article up for deletion should be required to show their ID everywhere and be subject to search - just for their protection! Dhanks 17:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep Notable (Bruce Schneier is an acclaimed authority on security), appropriate, good article. PizzaMargherita 19:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Seems a useful entry. Polymorp 11:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. This article provides an unambiguous definition of a commonly used phrase. gawp 12:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This concept is increasingly widely cited in the media. Example: Village Voice article on NYC nightclub security. [7] 16:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It's a rather new term, but it's already widely used - the quick inclusion of new phenomena is actually an advantage of Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.161.57.29 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep Wide media citation, common neutral usage in professional security community. 00:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Agunn (talk • contribs) 23:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Neologism, cirucular definition, useless garbage —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.174.103.116 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

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.