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: There was too little input to reach a consensus. However, the article improved during the course of the discussion; at the outset there were 0 sources while at the end there were two sources that utilized the term in title phrases and addressed the impact of the societal phenomenon. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note - this was closed 3hr 31min prior to a full five days of discussion --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Security Age[edit]

The Security Age (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Neologism. In a Google search there are a number of hits but this term is used in a general descriptive way but not as a defined term with a consistent meaning. The meaning ascribed appears to be the work of the creator. Delete. TerriersFan (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: This article is a stub now, but may be expanded, clearly defining the term's meaning as described in the G-hits, and explaining the various uses. If the meaning described in the article is that of the creator, the article can then be modified to more accurately reflect what is found in these G-hits (the more reliable ones).Hellno2 (talk) 17:01, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - all these things may happen but to survive the page needs reliable sources to meet WP:V, a policy requirement. TerriersFan (talk) 17:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Response - I am currently working on finding verifiable sources and making necessary improvements to this article.Hellno2 (talk) 20:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Good. However, the first reference gives a different name to the concept. References 2 and 3 use the phrase but in differing and undefined ways. What this is becoming is a Precautions against terrorism since 9/11 article and if you want to restructure it and move it to that title I should be happy to support it keeping The Security Age as a redirect. This would then have the makings of a decent page. TerriersFan (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Response - Though I have added these references for now for the sake of improving the article, this is just the beginning. But not all the G-hits I found for "security age" seem to pertain to increased security after 9/11, or security against terrorism for that matter. Some of them were written before 9/11/01. I am leaning toward the focus of the article being about the concept of increased security, regardless of the reason. If such an article already does exist, I would suggest merging this one into it.

Though the creator made it sound like the term "security age" refers to the post-9/11 world (and I can see where she is coming from), the concept of beefed-up security has always been with us, and such an article, though it would most likely mention 9/11, would also describe earlier times, and could provide a good comparison.Hellno2 (talk) 23:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - the nearest seems to be National security if you want a general security page. However, there is scope for an article comparing the precautions since 9/11 with those before and there is nothing suitable. Howsabout Security implications of 9/11? TerriersFan (talk) 00:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Response and proposal For the past few days, I have been looking this over. I feel that the ideal article would be as follows:
  • Would be about the concept of increased security
  • Would name and describe terms that have been used in such situations, such as "beefed-up security." This is where the term "security age" could be mentioned.
  • Would describe reasons why security needs to be increased, not limited to terrorism
  • Post-9/11 increased security would not dominate the article, but would be mentioned. I vaguely remember finding an article about security increases resulting from 9/11, and this one would be different.
  • The article would be written from an international viewpoint, and would not just be about the United States

I do not plan to rename the article before the AFD discussion is closed unless there is concensus to do so. I do plan to make some of these changes within the article's text, and I would appreciate if others contribute, too. If such an article does already exist, I would recommend simply merging this one into that.Hellno2 (talk) 16:30, 26 December 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.