Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disk-to-disk backup

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 delete. No evidence of notability and coverage sufficient for a standalone article has been provided Vanamonde (Talk) 18:41, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disk-to-disk backup[edit]

[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)

Doesn't meet WP:N; no suitable merge/redirect target. Boleyn (talk) 11:07, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nomination.TH1980 (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. The term does exist. There are some RS like this one: https://books.google.com/books?id=iAh6mU_sjgsC However, the only source mentioned in the article covers D2D2T, which is not the same as D2D. The way the article is referring to a list of backup software is somewhat unnatural. Maybe it was written just to make this reference. Dr.KBAHT (talk) 00:01, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Backup#Hard disk seems a valid but perhaps unnecessary redirect target. I've done disk-to-disk backups in various forms and flavours over many years, and the restore recoveries are more exciting. Topic probably notable, getting good content more difficult. Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:04, 3 August 2021 (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.