Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ada (computer virus)

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. Cirt (talk) 22:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ada (computer virus)

Extinct, rare DOS virus from the 90s with no notability established. There were thousands if not tens of thousands of trivial COM infectors of this type written, many virtually identical, and most like this one not very widespread, especially given the comparatively small installed based of the time and the non-networked mode of spread. Not notable. In general there are several other viruses in [[Category:DOS file viruses]] that probably should be removed, and if this is deleted please remove from the Ada disambig page. NTK (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - It was basically just copied more the mcfee site, but I think that it could be saved. I may try to work on it a bit. RockManQ (talk) 22:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This was pretty well known back in the day. The article needs enhancement, not erasure. Ecoleetage (talk) 23:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? I know I didn't do the inline citations right but it's overall a big improvment over the pasted and copied version. RockManQ (talk) 23:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also I pulled all of that information off of two sites, should be more out on the web. RockManQ (talk) 23:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I uploaded my sandbox, revert it if you like, but I think it's fine now except the inline citations. RockManQ (talk) 23:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not "fine." The only sources you have cited or used are two virus indexes. No secondary sources have been cited. This has done nothing to establish notability. Wikipedia is not a virus index. All you've done is rephrase and include more information from two virus indexes. As I said, there are tens of thousands of viruses not substantially different from Ada, and there is zero evidence that Ada was especially widespread or influential. It appears to be little more than a vanity virus for its creator. NTK (talk) 01:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per above THFFF (talk) 10:55, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Although I agree with User:NTK on some level as to this being a possibly redundant listing, this article has history and its content is decently notable. Especially when in 1991 network-spreadable viruses weren't commonplace, this type of virus is best matches some of the similar viruses in its time. Third-party sources may also be harder to find since the press wasn't exactly knowledgeable when it came to this kind of stuff in 1991, which would definitely attribute to the lack of sources as well as why there's really only a couple of major listings. However, if NTK wants to group all of the similar viruses to Ada and make a List article of these similar viruses, I'm open to merging this article into that list in the future. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 08:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as I recall this one so it was obviously somewhat notable. WikiScrubber (talk) 13:45, 1 September 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.