Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Information security standards

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 redirect‎ to IT security standards. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:37, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information security standards

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Information security standards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I think this is not notable. When I proposed this for deletion I was asked to consider redirection or merging. However I am not sure what article it should be redirected to or if redirection is suitable. And merging this info into an existing article may not be suitable either as it is completely uncited Chidgk1 (talk) 14:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Uncited, so there's no value in to trying to add the contents anywhere else as it'll just get removed there for having no sources. lizthegrey (talk) 15:29, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to IT security standards. While the article has an unsourced claim that the two topics are distinct, I don't believe that this is supported by RS. It's possible that some people do use the terms that way, but it does not appear to be common at all, so this title should be a redirect. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:40, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to IT security standards per Alpha3031. I found a textbook on it with SIGCOV: here (like Alpha3031 said, the textbook doesn't support the two topic being distinct). IMO not worth merging instead of redirecting.. DFlhb (talk) 21:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the aforementioned page. Suitskvarts (talk) 14:22, 18 October 2023 (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.