Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schneier's Law

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 Bruce Schneier. v/r - T P 16:02, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schneier's Law

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

Not notable. Lacks reliable sources. Joja lozzo 13:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why on earth would you nominate this for deletion? We have ample articles on both the unquestionably notable progenitors; just merge it to one of those if you're not convinced of its tenability. Skomorokh 13:44, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it could have been a merge request but I don't see how it fits anywhere on Doctorow's page and some mention of Schneier by Doctorow seems pretty tangential for Schneier's page. If someone can figure out where and how to merge it I wouldn't stand in the way. Joja lozzo 15:02, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – and I agree that it could be mentioned on one of the people articles, though it's not notable on its own Dicklyon (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The article is about another humorous maxim described as a scientific law. This one holds that Any person can invent a security system so clever that he or she can't imagine a way of breaking it. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources WP:RS to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. Googling suggests they don't exist. The only sources I could find (including searching Google books and scholar) were the Doctorow quote and that's just not enough for me. Doctorow may have found this notable, but nobody else has. It might be appropriate to mention this "law" on Bruce Schneier's page but there isn't a mention there now, except in the See also section. If this law isn't worth even a mention in the article about the man who supposedly invented it, I can't imagine how it could merit its own separate article. Msnicki (talk) 15:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wikiquote. —Ruud 17:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge per Msnicki or Dicklyon. Both have good arguments, and I can live with either outcome. Bearian (talk) 19:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Bruce Schneier or Delete Stuartyeates (talk) 04:56, 26 September 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.