Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Customer Access and Retrieval System


 * 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. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 20:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Customer Access and Retrieval System

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Very technical and impenetrable and out of date. Not obviously notable Rathfelder (talk) 15:33, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions. Rathfelder (talk) 15:33, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:54, 16 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Can't find any evidence that this meets WP:GNG or WP:NSOFTWARE. Colin M (talk) 22:07, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: The whacky acronyms of the titles discussed in the article (CARS and BOSS) are mildly amusing, but this article is describing a cog in a large machine, without giving any context about it. I believe it is eligible for speedy deletion, but that's probably just me. flowing dreams (talk page) 13:42, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to telecommunications billing. I believe the Phrack article is a reliable source for hacking of telecommunication systems, most or all of the article stems from that source. The context seems obvious to me; hackers want to know details of customer databases to aid in their activities. Such details are typically not made public, which is why there are no other secondary sources from mainstream publishers. With the one source, the article fails notability guidelines, but is still verifiable material. Unfortunately, I could not find any suitable merge targets. CARS is a type of telecommunications billing program (among other things) and a redirect would be useful to at least give context for the topic. Per our deletion policy WP:ATD, alternatives to deletion are preferred over deletion for verifiable material, and I think redirect is the best compromise here. -- 18:40, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG or WP:NSOFTWARE. I see no reason to redirect.4meter4 (talk) 13:38, 23 September 2019 (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.