Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human–computer interaction (security)

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 merge to Human–computer interaction. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:29, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Human–computer interaction (security)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unsourced. Further reading is a thesis and random articles. Presumably a subfield of human-computer interaction and could just be a small section in that article. ZimZalaBim ^talk 17:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect The current article on human-computer interaction doesn't have anything about security, and it should! This material isn't great, but it'd suffice as a start for a new section in that article. Dreamyshade (talk) 00:10, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD discussion has been proposed for merger to Human–computer interaction, and a notice of the proposed merger was posted to that page on June 22. As such, this AfD discussion may need to be extended or relisted to incorporate input from that page.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per above. SWinxy (talk) 03:10, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge w/o redirect; I agree that this is too short to be its own article (though I definitely think it could be one someday with a lot of work). However, this title is not suitable for a redirect, since it makes it seem that "security" is disambiguating the phrase "Human–computer interaction", which is wrong. (I'd support redirects from stuff like Human–computer interaction security or Security of human–computer interaction, though.) Also, quick FYI for the nominator: if an article has a list of references/further reading/external links but is otherwise unsourced/under-sourced, then the right tag to apply is not {{unreferenced}}, but rather {{no footnotes}}. Duckmather (talk) 23:03, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point that it's an awkward article name. The talk page suggests that usable security would be a better approach to naming an article on this topic, and I agree — "usable security" is the term of art, and it'd be a great article topic if somebody wanted to work on it. But still, reviewing the list at WP:R#KEEP, I believe a redirect would still be helpful to prevent link rot for external sites linking to the article, and because it'd preserve the non-trivial edit history. Dreamyshade (talk) 01:06, 26 June 2022 (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.