Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cybersecurity Strategy


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Cybersecurity Strategy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Original research, very similar article deleted at Articles for deletion/Cybersecurity strategy 5 Layout Capability Maturity Model  DGG ( talk ) 06:41, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.    Mr RD     06:51, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as I simply see nothing better at this time. Notifying PRODder . SwisterTwister   talk  07:34, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:26, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. There are several fundamental problems with this article, each of which is sufficient grounds for deletion: (1) To quote the deletion rationale for a previous version of this article, "This is a single analysis of cybersecurity, written as though there were 'one' strategy and 'one' framework for cybersecurity, which isn't by any means the case."[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Cybersecurity+strategy] By way of comparison, the Military strategy and Business strategy articles illustrate how the broad notion of strategy applicable to a particular field should be covered in an encyclopedic manner: Those articles (a) cite sources that discuss the field broadly, (b) discuss a variety of strategies that are individually notable in terms of WP:GNG, and (c) cite sources that compare and contrast those strategies. This article describes "The Cyber Security Strategy" as the be-all and end-all of strategic thinking in the field, which is neither true nor supportable by any reliable sources. (2) "The" strategy is defined in terms of some "recent standard Capability Maturity Model Cybersecurity", which is evidently so recent that it has yet to be promulgated as a standard anywhere, and in terms of "The CS5L, Cybersecurity 5 Layout model" (CS5L CMM) which was found not notable (both articles by the same contributor). As such this is essentially an essay of original research.  (3) Although not overtly promotional in tone, there appears to be a conflict of interest in using Wikipedia to promulgate ones own ideas, as presented in a blog post, or promoting the strategy and framework of one's own company.  In sum, as noted by Blue Rasberry in the above linked AfD, there appears to be a misunderstanding of what is meant by Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:42, 6 November 2015 (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.