Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mantrap (access control)


 * 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 Keep. ~ GB fan 17:55, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Mantrap (access control)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article seems like a dictionary definition and relies on a single article for its content. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 17:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 17:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 17:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 17:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Oppose. It's clearly more than a dictdef. Insufficient references is only a deletion criterion for living people. I have an open mind as to whether the article is likely to grow to be more than a stub. If not, then rather than being deleted it should be merged to e.g. Physical security. jnestorius(talk) 09:15, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Satisfies GNG. Capable of being expanded beyond a definition. James500 (talk) 02:46, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 11:19, 6 September 2018 (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.