Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of file verification software


 * 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 delete. No prejudice against creation of a "List of..." for this sort of list. Primefac (talk) 18:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Comparison of file verification software

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

this list fails WP:NOT as original research. There are a handful of notable software but it's been nothing but a spam target for years and I would suggest only the notable (ie. existing articles) entries be moved to List of file verification software as "comparison" is original research. Praxidicae (talk) 18:17, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Pi  (Talk to me!)  18:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. This article is problematic for a few reasons. Firstly, as Praxidicae mentions, the overwhelming majority of the software listed in the article are not notable and improperly include external links to places where you can purchase or download said software. As a result, this has made the page a very attractive target for people who wish to promote a particular product. This, of course, is not a reason to delete the article in itself, since we could simply just clean up the article to remove any non-notable software. This leads me to the second issue. After reviewing the few entries on this list that are bluelinks to Wikipedia articles, I discovered that for several of the programs, "file verification" is not their primary purpose: e.g. 7-Zip (file compression), TeraCopy (copying files between drives), Total Commander (file manager). As a result, it seems much of this list is a conglomeration of divergent pieces of software that just happen to have file verification as a side-feature, which makes this toe close to the line of WP:INDISCRIMINATE. What's left are programs that are able to calculate cryptographic hashes or checksums as their primary purpose, e.g. md5deep, sha3sum, and cksum. However, I am skeptical that these relatively esoteric pieces of software are sufficient to sustain the notability of this kind of comparison article per WP:LISTN. Mz7 (talk) 19:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Mz7 (talk) 19:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTCATALOGUE, WP:NOTLINKFARM and WP:NOR. The function of Wikipedia is not to be a product comparison site. Ajf773 (talk) 20:15, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * One option is to trim the tables to notable examples only and merge to File verification; we have kept plenty of similar comparison tables/lists but there's probably not a need for it to be standalone here. I'm noting FWIW that there is no corresponding category for Category:File verification software. postdlf (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ftr, I did try trimming it but was repeatedly called a vandal, so seemed like AFD was the only logical option. Praxidicae (talk) 14:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * AFD is not for resolving content disputes. I see you posted this AFD not even a half hour after first posting to the talk page, rather than seeing how discussion proceeded or seeking additional editor input. You also could have reported the inexperienced editor reverting you for edit warring. postdlf (talk) 18:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not using it to solve a dispute and I'm well acquainted with proper venues. Ideally I would have just been able to be bold and clean it up and do what I suggested but given the opposition, it seemed AFD is the best venue since it should be deleted in it's current form. This is the norm for AFD. Praxidicae (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment. There are a few hundred software comparison articles on Wikipedia (see Category:Software_comparisons). I know that "other stuff exists" is a bad argument to make at AfD, but it would be great if we could deal with these articles systematically. Obviously notability and policies like WP:NOTDIR are factors here. But is there an overall consensus on this type of article? BenKuykendall (talk) 01:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am for the nuclear option here and think Comparison of ... articles for the most part should be deleted per WP:NOT, since by their nature they almost all rely on original research. But in this particular case, I don't see any value for this article, hence my single AFD. Praxidicae (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment: If this is being used as a test case then it is appropriate to noifity appropriate WikiProjects as that is a WikiProject level interest beyond normal alerts Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete- Comparison of XYZ articles are often deleted, particularly if they are badly sourced. This one seems to be nothing but a directory of software, most entries of which are not notable. Reyk YO! 11:36, 9 June 2020 (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.