Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thumbsucking

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 appropriate information to Data theft, then redirect to Thumb sucking. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbsucking

WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Nardman1 14:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Data theft since the 2 references cited did not use the term "Thumbsucking," and do not in fact say very much about anything. Wikipedia is not a forum for introducing neologisms one has thought up. Also, even if this was a term of art for a method of data theft, there should be a disambiguating term added to avoid someone coming to this article to look for information about Thumb sucking, the more common use of the term. The article could be moved to Thumbsucking (data theft) if it is not actually merged to that article. The data theft technique has been shown on such TV dramas as Veronica Mars and CSI multiple times. Edison 15:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say that the actual problem is original research. I saw the article title and expected that this discussion was going to be a discussion of a badly written stub about an aspect of children's behaviour, which we have an article on at thumb sucking. But the article isn't about the subject by this name that can be found copiously documented. It's about something that isn't documented anywhere by this name, or in a way that is specific to thumbdrives, as far as I can see. (Here's some irony: I did various searches, to try to narrow down the focus to stuff about thumbdrives. I still kept hitting articles talking about children sucking their thumbs.) Neither of the articles linked to by this article support any such concept of thumbsucking, and discussions of the security implications of USB flash drives in general belongs in USB flash drive#Security, where those implications are in fact already addressed. Uncle G 16:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, a recent article in Dark Reading (http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=122252&WT.svl=news2_1) mentions the term (which made me look it up on wiki). Additionally, the similar terms (which are linked to from the article) pod slurping, bluesnarfing, bluejacking, and sneakernet are all documented on Wikipedia, so why not this term, even if it is new? I agree, that due to the similarity of the term to the human behavior "thumb sucking," the name should be changed to "Thumbsucking (data theft) to avoid confusion. Sifujc 00:16, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As pointed out above: We don't include new things that have not been already documented outside of Wikipedia and that have not yet been accepted into the general corpus of human knowledge, per our Wikipedia:No original research policy. The source that you cite isn't an article about "thumbsucking". It is an article about the security of USB storage devices. It provides no evidence that this subject is even called "thumbsucking" by more than just the people who coined that name, let alone support for a full article on the subject. There's no evidence that this new name for the subject has caught on, and even if it it had that wouldn't justify a separate article. Wikipedia is not a dictionary of "terms". It is an encyclopaedia. We don't have separate duplicate articles for the same subject under different names. All of the discussion about the security of USB storage devices that the source supports belongs in the obvious place: USB flash drive#Security. Uncle G 11:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as neologism and redirect to thumb sucking Changed - see below. – Tivedshambo (talk) 16:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on grounds of original research. The issue with a redirect is that it would give the air of legitimacy for what appears to be neologism. --Aarktica 12:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge / Redirect: Redirect Thumbsucking to Thumb sucking, and place disambiguation link at Thumb sucking: "This article refers to infant thumb sucking. For the method of downloading or stealing data from a computer or network, see Data theft", and then Merge current information at Thumbsucking to Data theft, mentioning it as a slang term there (with a source link reference), where there is already a discussion of using a USB thumb drive for such activities. --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 13:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent suggestion, T-dot. Some new references have appeared in the article, particularly this one. I'm not convinced that the term thumb-sucking is widespread enough to have its own article, even with a disambig, but it can be citeably mentioned in Data theft. Therefore Merge (to Data theft) and redirect (to Thumb sucking) – Tivedshambo (talk) 20:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Data theft. Also, check out Survey results expose the threat of thumbsucking. Although there seems to be enough WP:RS material to write an attributable article on the topic so that the topic meets Wikipedia notability guidelines and the article can meet Wikipedia article policies, it is a short article that requires the background material or context from a broader article for readers to understand it. Per context merge, the page should be merged. -- Jreferee 21:04, 26 April 2007 (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.