Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Signatures with efficient protocols

Signatures_with_efficient_protocols

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:GNG's significant reliable source coverage requirement. Neither of the academics responsible for the research has a wikipedia article, and references are limited to the academics' own research. Did a search and didn't come up with anything saying otherwise. Batard0 (talk) 18:38, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and WP:GNG. Qworty (talk) 23:58, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This appears to be more frequently called something like the Camenisch–Lysyanskaya signature scheme, or alternatively SRSA-CL. Our article is in need of secondary sources rather than the primary source it gives, but there are plenty of them: this paper has 381 citations in Google scholar, and a search of Google books found around 1000 hits, the first few of them looking very relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per David Eppstein. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 08:16, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 10:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (with reservations): This article does seem like it could be notable, but I haven't been able to identify whether it is unique and framed properly. —Zujine|talk 15:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]