Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superantispyware

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 no consensus. NW (Talk) 01:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Superantispyware

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable software. ospalh (talk) 11:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep SUPERAntiSpyware has nearly 20 million worldwide users, is recommended by Dell tech support (among others), is used as a tool on forums such as Majorgeeks and TechSupport Forum, and is available through major software retailers such as CompuCom, Software House International, Computer Troubleshooters, and Tiger Direct. It has as much merit as any other commercially available software mentioned in any other wikipedia entry.

Delete. Not notable, refs give only one mainstream indep. source, and that's only a review. Primarily a promotional article. Ohiostandard (talk) 12:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Another advertisement for someone's pet software project. Fuzbaby (talk) 00:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A popular, reasonably-well-known piece of software that's often enough recommended for use by independent sources. Review of software in major magazine is strong indication of notability; exactly what other sort of coverage should we be looking for? Plausible search term, useful content -- that's what Wikipedia articles are supposed to provide. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom B.Rossow ^talk_contr 17:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant Keep Just notable enough between the PC World review and this one I came across. Article definitely needs work. --Cybercobra (talk) 18:58, 21 September 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.