Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cybersecurity CS5L CMM

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. Kurykh (talk) 00:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cybersecurity CS5L CMM

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

Delete as yet another recreation of deleted content. This article, with varying names, has been deleted at least four times, but the editor keeps bringing it back.

The article is also sitting at User:Mmalizola/sandbox. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:36, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment. The editor and author of this concept has this posted all over the web. But the article here is not a copyright violation since it was at Articles for Creation long before it was online anywhere else. StarryGrandma (talk) 06:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (Possible CSD G4): A WP:OR article previously deleted after multiple AfD discussions. (I have linked these on the article Talk page, including a 3rd AfD in which I recalled participating.) I see no reason to overturn previous AfD consensus. AllyD (talk) 07:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 07:44, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 07:44, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse G4 and Delete This is basically then same article that has been deleted 4 times over the past 2ish years in addition to many draft declines. Winner 42 Talk to me! 13:09, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Fun extra note: The original patroller is a now-blocked sockpuppet of User:Taokaka. This could explain why it has gone 8 months with no one noticing this. Winner 42 Talk to me! 13:12, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete my guess is that the idea was to promote someone's consulting business? W Nowicki (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (Possible CSD G4): See my rationale at one of the previous discussions. This is the same thing from the same contributor who refuses to recognize or abide by the Notability guideline. ~ Ningauble (talk) 23:01, 29 April 2017 (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.