Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cryptographically secure random number generators: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
|||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 0 auto; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
<!--
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result of the debate was '''DELETE'''. -[[User:Splash|Splash]] 22:33, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
===[[Cryptographically secure random number generators]]===
'''Delete'''. This is a weird rant and/or original research. I'm sure that there's an article in there some place, but it's not written as such.
Line 6 ⟶ 12:
*'''Delete''' - OR. (Pretty much anything with the word "I" in it is fair game for deletion, methinks). [[User:Demogorgon's Soup-taster|Demogorgon's Soup-taster]] 08:56, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' to [[Pseudorandom]] or the other article noted with the almost identical name or something else appropriate. Just because the content is bad, doesn't mean that it should be deleted. Its a legit topic. [[User:Roodog2k|Roodog2k]] [[User_talk:Roodog2k|(talk)]] 11:04, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per ''combination'' [[User:UniReb|UniReb]] 11:28, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' or '''redirect''' to [[cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator]]. There's no content worth merging; we cover this stuff at [[hardware random number generator]] (as per ManoaChild). [[User:Matt Crypto|— Matt <small>Crypto</small>]] 11:39, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
*'''Strong delte''' this is in effect a personal esay -- a collection of personal views on what makes a good CSRNG. This is all covered in more detail and in more encyclopediac fashion at [[cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator]]. After deletion, create a preemtive redirect to that page, but theere is no reason to retain the current article in the page history. (If no consensus to delete, redir, do not simply keep)[[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 18:48, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
*''Delete''' OR. [[User:Dottoreso|Dottore So]] 00:56, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' or '''redirect'''. This is not only a personal opinion but sufficiently indistinct that it cannot even be tested (to the extent such things can be tested) as it stands. Actually the redirect to the CSPRNG would be best for readers looking for CSRNG should definitely be told that no such thing as a CSRNG actually exists and that the concept the term supposedly refers to is a snark. An important bit of context for the non cryptiacs. [[User:Ww|ww]] 18:46, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an [[Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion|undeletion request]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''</div>
| |||