Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Master of Science in Information Assurance

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 No consensus to delete, but a merge to Information Assurance can be considered by editors.--Doc^g 21:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Master of Science in Information Assurance[edit]

A completely unsourced article on a course in a subject whose own article has massive problems (see information assurance). PRODded but challenged, so here it is at AfD. Guy (Help!) 15:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Every major could have a Master's. Without sources that actually call the degree itself notable, it's not notable. Blast Ulna (talk) 22:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, just because it's possible to make an article doesn't mean there should be one. Non-notable degree TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 00:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, if someone is willing to add secondary sources. MrPrada (talk) 05:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I originally deleted it as an expired prod, but I see from [1] that a number of schools do offer this degree--I was not sure there is a standard term, but judging by the NSA, this is now the phrase used. DGG (talk) 07:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A number of schools offer a vegan meal plan, too. Should we have an article on that? Blast Ulna (talk) 12:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - We already do. So are you now saying that we should keep this article? Splash - tk 13:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Shucks, you almost got me. What I am saying is, suppose someone wrote an well-sourced article, Meal plan, which are experienced by millions of college students. Then somebody else comes along and writes a completely unsourced article, Vegan meal plan, which I'm sure some colleges offer. I disagree with notion that showing some links to some colleges that offer vegan meal plans means that vegan meal plans are notable. On the other hand, an article in Time magazine on vegan meal plans would establish that notability. Same here; colleges offer degrees in many different subjects, and of course links can be found for them. So does that make the degree notable? No. Reliable, third party sources do. Blast Ulna (talk) 23:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Seeing as dozens of schools, if not more, offer this program, I doubt there is a problem locating third party sources from the various academics, professors, etc involved in the course material, not to mention major corporations with Competitive Intelligence Departments, the US Military, the National Security Agency, etc. MrPrada (talk) 06:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        This is not a debate over the subject of Information Assurance, which has its own article, but over an MS in the subject. Why don't you help us out and find some sources that attest to the notability of the degree, then? An article in the newspaper that says something like, "the technological arms race with computer hackers has brought us an unusual new degree, a Master of Science in Information Assurance..." Blast Ulna (talk) 07:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Exactly. The article says nothing that is not obvious form the subject: we have master of science and we have information assurance, and the master of science in information assurance says that you can do an MSc in IA. Arbitrary level of qualification in arbitrarily chosen subject. Guy (Help!) 07:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Most of the people who are contributing to the articles about Information Assurance hold the degree. There are numerous academic journals such as [2], or the NSA's 50 centers of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance. I happen to have served in an IO role in the Army so I think editing these might be a COI, but there ARE sources out there. MrPrada (talk) 07:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        I have no doubt that Information Assurance is notable and a noble field of endeavour. The degree isn't. And there is no COI, the thing is not the thing mapped. Blast Ulna (talk) 08:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
comment It has in the past been our practice to keep articles on every individual named degree, even if only a single college offers it, on the grounds that it is the sort of information people would look for in an encyclopedia. DGG (talk) 14:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note, but there may be a changing consensus, see this AfD, for example. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 15:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - In that AfD, which was earlier this February, DGG said Weak Delete, so his consensus might be changing the other way. Blast Ulna (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nom. Unnotable, unnecessary and unencyclopedic. Eusebeus (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as completely unnecessary. [SUBJECT] might be important, but "Master of Art/Science in [SUBJECT]" isn't. --Calton | Talk 16:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A viable heuristic might be that the only necessary degrees are those that appear standalone in the postnominal letters (and not in parentheses). Assuming that the holder of this particular degree uses the traditional MSc/MS postnominals, then this cross-cut doesn't get an article, nor if it goes as something like MSc (IA) nor MSIA. Whereas, a Master of Engineering would use MEng, so that degree does get an article (and has). Then, that degrees in the non-postnominal parts of the degrees are available is a matter for mention in the specialism's article. Splash - tk 23:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the MSIA is an important degree in a relatively new field of study and it is important for security practitioners who have earned the MSIA degree to have a valid source to cite that describes the nature of their degree qualification. There are many other Masters degree articles in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Master%27s_degrees); are we going to remove all of them? cadill (talk) 08:50, 28 February 2008
- Comment ignoring other stuff exists for the moment, the key part to your argument is invalid, this is not a valid source to cite because it has no citations. There's no merit to this at the moment. No verification. I recognize toy created this article and have a vested interest in it, but if kept it needs a lot of improvement.TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 15:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Keep It! I am part of this program and it needs this type of recognition - Krystal Bergeron, a Master of Information Assurance Student — 155.201.35.53 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Keep it, If we're saying Wikipedia isn't an appropriate venue for people seeking out information on the definitaion of an MSIA, then what is? Last I knew, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia of knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.167.100.50 (talk) 18:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC) — 70.167.100.50 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep, Is the NSA not a reputable third-party source? The accreditation process from the NSA is extremely rigorous. There are only 86 accredited schools. The degree may not be noted in some big magazines but it is well received within the actual field of information security. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cptserious (talk • contribs) 20:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC) — Cptserious (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Merge into Information Assurance, but the list of external links to institutions offering the course should go as Wikipedia is not a directory. Many articles on professions have sections on training, courses, qualification, accreditation or whatever, e.g. Biostatistics#Education and Training Programs. I see no case for separate articles in general. Splash's "viable heuristic" above on where to draw the line sounds eminently sensible to me. My university taught a "Master of Science in Numerical Solutions of Differential Equations". WP has articles on both Numerical ordinary differential equations and Numerical partial differential equations, and an article on Master of Science, but no article on "Master of science in numerical solutions of differential equations" and that's the way it should stay. Qwfp (talk) 01:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A person may wish to cite Wikipedia as a reference for the nature of their degree. Look at all the other pages of Masters degrees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Master%27s_degrees) and tell us why the MSIA page should be deleted and not the others. — 155.33.199.205 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Just because other stuff exists is not a reason for this to TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 16:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Besides, you'd be much better off citing the website describing the particular course you took. It would be more specific and (probably) more reliable (though give the nature of the course, I'd guess many of the students would find it almost as easy to alter a university webpage as a Wikipedia page ;-) Qwfp (talk) 19:27, 29 February 2008 (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.