Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Home 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 keep. MBisanz ^talk 12:03, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Home security

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

References don't support the text, which is not encyclopaedic. Not notable Rathfelder (talk) 21:56, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've little doubt that the topic itself is notable under guidelines and that the subheading under Security#Home_security is wholly insufficient. But this article isn't extensive, neutral, well-cited, or even informative; Wikipedia:Blow_it_up_and_start_over. This should probably go over to Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation once this article is gone. It's a topic that could be written extensively upon.--69.204.153.39 (talk) 22:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Someone needs to
WP:ATD). Improvement is certainly possible here, and should be favored over deletion. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 00:28, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. - clearly notable topic. with a bad article. not a reaon for deletion.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Reading the comments here and the relevant guidelines again, I'm persuaded to keep this pending improvements and have changed my above recommendation accordingly.--69.204.153.39 (talk) 02:41, 9 October 2015 (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.