Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Win32 Swizzor

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. Fritzpoll (talk) 10:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Win32 Swizzor

Not a particularly notable trojan. Been around since 2006 and rates medium according to ca.com - second prod (original poster deleted the first without comment). I've PROD'd it twice, and original poster continues to remove the prod. I don't want to bust 3RR so I'm bringing to AFD. OP claims that WP should have all the world's information. I've tried to explain politely that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, but I'll leave it to the community to decide. (additional info on my talk page and on the article's talk page) JCutter (talk) 14:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information is probably the most misused and misquoted rule in AfDs. The list includes: Plot summaries, Lyrics databases, Statistics, News reports. Which this page falls under none of them. 23,000 google hits, 68 news hits, which have this virus in the title and are the main subject of the article. Please consider WP:PRESERVE and WP:BEFORE before nominating an article. thank you. Ikip (talk) 14:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This AfD has been listed on: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Malware, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Internet, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer science, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing . Ikip (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This has plenty of sources to back up notability as shown above by Ikip. BigDunc^Talk 15:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Does not qualify in Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. In spite of medium importance, it is notable and consequently it must be kept. Pmlinediter (talk) 15:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Followup Comment from AFD nominator - Respectfully, to clarify a bit:

I did not bring up the AFD because of IINFO, I brought it up because it's not a notable trojan. I only mention IINFO because the OP claimed on my talk page that WP should have all the world's information.
IINFO's 4 categories that you mention are not ever represented to be the ONLY pages which should not contain IINFO, they are just mentioned as 4 types which should not consist solely of IINFO.
As I am sure you know from your malware project experience, there are too many viruses/trojans to list them all on WP.
Google search counts for virus names are always ridiculously high due to the fact that thousands of pages shadow report the list of viruses found from other pages.
Of the 68 news hits you linked, none are from 2009, 10 are from 2008 (mostly foreign language) and the others are older (as I said in my AFD - a 2006 trojan).
I've read the articles you suggested, and none seem to suggest that editors should make something notable out of something not-notable in order to preserve it.

I've been wrong before, and I am sure I'll be wrong again, and I might be wrong right now - but I wanted to clarify those points. JCutter (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment. No opinion on whether Win32 Swizzor merits a freestanding article, but there are tens of thousands of malware programs, so WP:IINFO is certainly a consideration. Wikipedia is neither an anti-virus database, nor a "search on everything". / edg ☺ ☭ 15:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:N. Notability isn't evidenced in the article, and I haven't found any coverage of it other than its existance and information on how to remove it (which would appear for any trojan) in google news, nor in a standard google search. Per WP:N this trojan must be discussed significantly in reliable sources. I haven't found significant, reliable coverage beyond a trivial level and noone else here has offered up any sources. "This is a trojan, here's how to remove it" isn't good enough. If you want to !vote to keep this you should make sure it is up to our notabilty guideline and verifiability policy. There's no excuse to !vote to keep an unreferenced article! Them From Space 06:39, 17 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.