Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of BitTorrent software (2nd nomination)


 * 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 per consensus. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 03:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Comparison of BitTorrent software (2nd nomination)

 * - (View AfD) (View log)
 * - (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia's not..., original research... This is not encyclopaedic information and has been built up independently of external sources. The referenced sources do not provide a reference for the comparison of such software but rather that individual software has certain features. See also: Articles for deletion/Comparison of BitTorrent software. Thanks/wangi 23:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * keep To take two (etc) sets of features and make a table out of them is not OR. OR would be determining what features the software has from direct investigation. This is straight-forward assembling of available information.DGG 04:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * weak keep I agree per above that this isn't OR. Yet, I also question the usefullness of such a list, although I would be slightly more inclined to keep it. Hobbeslover talk/contribs 04:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Although I will vote for delete in his bundled BitTorrent index comparison Hobbeslover talk/contribs 04:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I Agree KEEP!! At least for now... This is a fairly new technology and very little independent (self serving) information seems to be available right now. Wiki whatever has become a constant companion tool for all types of research for the past year. As this technology grows and gets more attention, then deletion at a later date may be considered if necessary.
 * Keep. Keep them per DGG. (as chance would have it I was reading the articles only a little while earlier this week!) Mathmo Talk 13:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC
 * Keep It is in need of cleanup, but it has nothing that warrants deletion, as nothing in it is OR, as the information about the clients are gathered from sources. Darthnader37 00:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is how I generally pick my file sharing applications (Wikipedia comparison charts). It is kinda long but useful.--Taboo Tongue 18:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. A great way to compare the best BitTorrent Clients for new users. --41.243.68.13 21:09, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: Not strictly original research, and useful in some cases, but I'd question its general usefulness. - Davidjk (msg+edits) 23:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep (for Comparison of BitTorrent software). We're discussing 2 pages of differeing quality. The software comparison page is useful (it sums up important information about dozens of different BT clients), not original research (most of that data is available in changelogs, version descriptions, on the clients' hompages or even their respective WP articles) and well-maintained. No reason to delete it. --89.55.184.128 23:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Great for new or interested or out of date users. --70.51.219.7 02:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.