Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One-way security
- 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 cryptographic hash function. PhilKnight (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- One-way security (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article is unreferenced for over two years, fails the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 08:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wizardman 17:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to cryptographic hash function, if anyone ever finds a reference they can restore the article. --Explodicle (T/C) 18:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Google disagrees, appears to be made up term. Redirect unnecessary. MediaMob (talk) 21:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll see your google search and raise you one of its hits. --Explodicle (T/C) 15:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The term used in that article is "one-way" security, which is a description of the method, not a term for the cryptographic technology. The paper is referring to one-way functions. Wronkiew (talk) 17:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Are either of these what you have in mind? [1][2] --Explodicle (T/C) 18:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, there is at least one instance of the term being used in the field of cryptography. A redirect wouldn't hurt. Wronkiew (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Agree that this is a made up term for a real technology. Cryptographic hash function is a much more complete article about the same topic. Wronkiew (talk) 05:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and redirect to Cryptographic hash function, for which the title is a neologism. Erik the Red 2 (AVE·CAESAR) 18:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:01, 21 August 2008 (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.