Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Message Weaving Algorithm
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mangojuice (talk | contribs) at 12:05, 18 October 2007 (signing closure). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 12:05, 18 October 2007 by Mangojuice (talk | contribs) (signing closure)
- 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 Delete —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jreferee (talk • contribs)
- Message Weaving Algorithm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Contested prod. This is about a cipher that is web-published, not published in any reliable source, not peer-reviewed. It was part of a walled garden with Imran Shaik and Definite Avalanche, both of which were deleted through PROD. The article was created by User:Iashaik; the algorithm inventor is Imran Shaik. Mangojuicetalk 15:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. If this were a cipher taken seriously by the crypto community, I'd expect to see some hits for it in Google scholar, but I couldn't find any. —David Eppstein 17:23, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's because the sources are all encrypted, so the joke's on you! Actually, the sources are an apparently pending M.Sc. thesis, and a website that doesn't contain (or at least cannot find, see first sentence) any reference to the article subject. Delete unless independent verification of notability can be established. Sheffield Steeltalkstalk 20:47, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Nothing in EBSCO computer-science index. DMacks 18:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 'delete per David Eppstein & DMacks. Pete.Hurd 05:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete due to lack of reliable sources confirming notability. --Nehwyn 17:44, 14 October 2007 (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.