Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Website fingerprinting


 * 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. Staxringold talkcontribs 00:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Website fingerprinting

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Original research with spam link. &mdash; RHaworth 22:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as an OR essay. Thryduulf (talk) 09:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 09:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete, G11 blatantly promotes one companies product. Wuh  Wuz  Dat  12:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as OR essay and spam: blatantly promoting their product. Tangurena (talk) 12:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - promotional for one company, rest reads like an essay or marketing promo piece. Canterbury Tail   talk  13:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Some of this seems to be a copyvio of this site. I've marked as so, but I'm not sure what license Blogger normally goes by. Greg Tyler (t &bull; c) 17:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Although I think articles about technology should be kept, this article is too poorly written and nothing better to revert to. Anything to merge this into? --Abc518 (talk) 23:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi i have clarified that the blog belongs to me. we are the original inventors of the technology being described. So it may seem like the article is promoting one company's products. if you search the web, you are unlikely to find anything related to website fingerprinting. please guide me how i could make an entry so that it does not violate wiki's policy. --Gautamjayaraman (talk) 05:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It's impossible then. Wikipedia's notability rules require that there be coverage of the technology in secondary sources. If it's any consolation, you're in good company; there are many other otherwise okay articles which get deleted for the same reason. --Cyber cobra (talk) 07:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, it's generally not advisable to start Wikipedia articles on companies/products/websites/etc. you're involved in due to the inherent conflict of interest. --Cyber cobra (talk) 07:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per lack of non-primary sources. --Cyber cobra (talk) 07:12, 10 September 2009 (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.