Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of computer virus hoaxes


 * 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. Mailer Diablo 14:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

List of computer virus hoaxes
Unencyclopedic. Too many redlinks. (The article was created in January 2004, but still most links are red links) TPA5 21:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOT a collection of lists, especially when the items in the list aren't notable to have an article for themselves. -- Steel 22:40, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOT, 75%+ red links in the body, no content besides the list itself. I think it also qualifies for WP:CSD A3. Torinir  ( Ding my phone  My support calls   E-Support Options  ) 00:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -- as useless list --T-rex 01:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT, worthless list. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 04:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Lists are acceptable if they fulfil the purpose of lists. This list's purpose is to be the companion to list of computer viruses (as per WikiProject Malware), and is clearly to be an informational list.  The scope of the list (see Lists (stand-alone lists)) is neither too narrow nor too broad, given that the set of computer virus hoaxes is finite and small but not minuscule; and the list is easily sourced from sources such as this one and this one, thereby eliminating original research.  That the article comprises temptation to write lots of perpetual-stub sub-articles is a reason to de-link the names on the list, not a reason to delete the article.  Indeed, those titles should be redirects to this list.  Keep. Uncle G 11:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Petter 13:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC) Could serve a pupose if expanded.
 * Delete as a random and unhelpful list. It's main purpose would be to aid research into computer virus hoaxes, yet putting "computer virus hoaxes" into Google returns more helpful material. This simply diverts and wastes people's time. If it is unhelpful and wastes people's time, then I can't see a reason for keeping it. SilkTork 13:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That the article is far from finished is not a reason for deleting it. Uncle G 14:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per the rationale given by Uncle G. The list can be improved, but computer viruses are undeniably a notable subject and such a list -- even if articles on individual viruses do not yet exist -- is useful. IMO far less useful lists have been kept. 23skidoo 14:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but needs major attention, including a COMPLETE REWRITE!!!! Antares33712 15:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per all keep arugments 216.141.226.190 12:19, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Uncle G. -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 16:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, useless list. --Off! 03:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Vegaswikian 05:26, 21 July 2006 (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.