Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyberconfidence

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberconfidence

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

This article appears to describe a neologism: It's sourced, yes, but term appears in none of the sources. A quick Google fails to reveal use in independent and reliable sources. (It seems to be a trademark owned by CSC used in a website they run.) The article also asserts the importance of the concept (as opposed to describing it neutrally). wctaiwan (talk) 02:54, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems to be a vacuous neologism for network security. Chief purpose of the page seems to be to drum up traffic for a "csc.com" website, which is where most of the "references" end up. The others are a snow job: you will look in vain for the word "cyberconfidence" in the linked Forbes and New York Times articles. Obviously a promotional insertion. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:29, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Although the IP has done some useful edits, IMO, this Article is just corperate spam Exit2DOS ^{• Ctrl • Alt • Del} 23:44, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Spam and a neologism. --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Checked a few references in the current article and there was no mention of the term "CyberConfidence", indicating a problem with reliable sources. Further, I did several sweeps of major newspapers and magazines in US, worldwide, including computer-related publications, and got no hits for "CyberConfidence". So I have confidence that this subject is not notable.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.