Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;--

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 to xkcd. Valid search term. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert'); DROP TABLE Students;--

It's a nice XKCD reference, but there is no reliable source that indicates that this translated into any sort of notability. (The massive list of references are actually just other related ~~comics~~comics or unreliable blogs for the most part). NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 02:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. My favorite XKCD comic, but no indication of notability outside of a few blogs and websites. eaolson (talk) 02:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete anyone who knows to search for this bit of trivia would surely look for xkcd; WP is not an xkcd search service. JJL (talk) 03:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep You might try actually reading the references. The only "other comic" in the list is the first one, which refers to that cartoon as a classic. Yes, the references are all online; there's not a lot of printed material available about SQL security issues - except for those targeted at SQL Server and to a much lesser extend Oracle, which are unlikely venues for this terminology to show up in. So maybe the page is premature - but I don't think so, any more than the entry for real programmer is premature.Mwmeyer (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, there are not any non-blog or comic references. The parts about SQL security issues should go in the actual article on SQL, not on an xkcd-related page. If in the future, this specific comic makes a minor change to the world of sql programming or there is an issue about it, perhaps a mention in xkcd and SQL would be warranted, but not an entire article. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 04:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject is NN standalone. Some of those references could also be used in this section of the article on xkcd aside from the SQL article. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 04:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NN, but consider including relevant material in SQL injection ("SQL injection in popular culture" section would be quite amusing). -- Scjessey (talk) 04:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 06:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 06:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Xkcd, or even possibly to SQL injection which is what his name is supposed to illustrate. With only two sentences here, and most of the references being brief allusions in blogs, it doesn't look like this merits being a stand-alone article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. I love xkcd, really. But you can't feasibly have an article for cartoon in the series that someone construes as particularly funny or notable. This should have been speedied (with the right template). Greg Tyler ^{(t • c)} 10:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no CSD template that would apply here. Since the article claims that this xkcd comic is at least somewhat notable, no csd template, even {{db-web}} apply to the best of my knowledge. NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 13:40, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The xkcd comic is clearly notable. Some of its highpoints should be mentioned in the article about it. DGG (talk) 15:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to either SQL injection or xkcd Sceptre ^(talk) 17:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to xkcd. Apparently someone thought this title is a likely search term and a redirect does not hurt us. Of course there is no reason to keep it as an article per reasons above and I am saying that as a huge fan of the comic and that strip in particular. So Why 20:16, 18 April 2009 (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.