Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graphical Identification and Authentication: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:45, 8 February 2022

Revision as of 05:08, 19 March 2022

Line 11:

:{{la|Graphical Identification and Authentication}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Graphical Identification and Authentication|wpReason={{urlencode: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graphical Identification and Authentication]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graphical Identification and Authentication|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 January 8#{{anchorencode:Graphical Identification and Authentication}}|View log]])</noinclude>

[[WP:NOTE|Non notable]] and poorly written, wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of DLL articles ([[WP:NOT]]), etc. If a single reference can be added pertaining to some kind of notability then I'll be more than satisfied. [[User:Verbal|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#CC7722"; face="font-family:Papyrus;">'''Verbal'''</fontspan>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<fontspan colorstyle="color:grey"; face="font-family:Papyrus;">chat</fontspan>]]</small> 08:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

* '''Keep''' and mark for cleanup. Article lacks context, but describes an important technology that allows Windows to use logon authentication mechanisms more secure than the usual username/password combination. [[User:JulesH|JulesH]] ([[User talk:JulesH|talk]]) 09:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Line 17:

*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Software|list of Software-related deletion discussions]]. </small> <small>-- [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 11:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)</small>

*'''Keep''' A secure login mechanism is notable and neither bad writing nor the indiscriminate list are relevant for deletion. Bad writing is specifically excluded as a valid reason for deletion, and the article is not a list, let alone an indiscriminate one. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|^(talk)]] 11:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

:* I think you misunderstood my (probably too short) proposal. The poor quality of the article is not why I thought it should be deleted, but is not a good reason for keeping. The reason for deletion I proposed is notability, and I don't see why a secure logon process is inherently notable. The reference to WP:NOT was to the fact that wikipedia is not an indiscriminate list of information - we don't have articles on all DLLs. Now, if I4m wrong and this DLL is notable then I have no problem with it having an article - but since it apparently is no longer used in Vista and Win7 I think it's unlikely. I could easily be swayed to a keep if any references to notability are presented. Thanks! [[User:Verbal|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#CC7722"; face="font-family:Papyrus;">'''Verbal'''</fontspan>]] <small>[[User talk:Verbal#top|<fontspan colorstyle="color:grey"; face="font-family:Papyrus;">chat</fontspan>]]</small> 16:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

*'''Keep'''. Not intolerably badly written. This is a description of an optional security feature in Microsoft Windows, apparently. The fact that this software is apparently ''from'' Microsoft weighs in its favor, since Microsoft doesn't really need to resort to inserting bogus Wikipedia articles for marketing purposes. - [[User:Ihcoyc|Smerdis of Tlön]] ([[User talk:Ihcoyc|talk]]) 15:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

:*'''Comment'''. The page seems to have been substantially re-written from the version that was nominated. - [[User:Ihcoyc|Smerdis of Tlön]] ([[User talk:Ihcoyc|talk]]) 14:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)