Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Hacker


 * 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 White hat. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-08 21:34Z 

Anti-Hacker


Not-notable neologism, no references Alex Bakharev 03:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC) I put reference. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WhiteJordan (talk • contribs).
 * Delete per nom. Reference provided is not independent. --N Shar 03:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Definition given applies as much to a hacker as an "anti-hacker." No reference is provided just a set of independent wiki-links. ◄  Zahakiel  ►  03:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Found some stuff documenting some anti-hackers but not the term itself. MER-C 04:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. NN as per WP:NEO. Ronbo76 05:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to White hat, reasonably plausible search term and redirects are cheap. Serpent&#39;s Choice 06:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above. The concept may exist, but the term does not. Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  06:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki, possibly, to Wiktionary Tuvok  ^ Talk 08:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strongly support Redirect to White hat per Serpent&#39;s Choice reasoning. Mathmo Talk 11:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * But are they the same thing? I thought a 'White hat' was a hacker who worked for a legitimate organisation, whilst a so-called 'anti-hacker' is someone who hacks other hackers. I could very easily be wrong though. Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  12:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * They are not precise synonyms, but appear to share substantial similarities. Especially given the lack of context at this article and dismal prospects of expansion with currently available references, it seems the best I could offer.  Serpent&#39;s Choice 12:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There are similarities, as the last comment has said, but I think the terms are different enough that a simple redirect might be misleading. If the White Hat entry were expanded to include mention of an anti-hacker, that might be acceptable; but even then we are still dealing with a neologism.  I still think deletion is the most reasonable option.   ◄ Zahakiel ►  18:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as nonsensical neologism - what exactly is the opposite of a hacker? A White hat hacker isn't. A computer secrity expert isn't. Artw 16:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak redirect or delete. If the redirect doesn't constitute OR, then create it, otherwise delete.  (Tough decision here) &mdash;siro&chi;o 16:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete nn neologism -- Selmo  (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to White hat.  . V .  [Talk 20:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not notable, and for reasons stated above--  SU IT  -n-tie 20:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * 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.