Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of remote administration tools


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 00:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

List of remote administration tools
Delete because Category:Remote administration software already fulfills this role quite adequately without constantly attracting commercial spam. AlistairMcMillan 00:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Totally agree with nom. I don't mind lists if they contain other information, but this has nothing to separate it from the category. - Hahnch  e  n 00:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as listcruft-- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 00:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - unnecessary article. - Richardcavell 01:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the list, but I can think of a handful that aren't on this list or in this cat. Kotepho 02:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, listcruft. --Ter e nce Ong 02:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete; per nom &mdash; ßottesiηi  Tell me what's up 02:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Sorry Guy 03:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with nomination. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 03:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. History page shows that commercial links have had to be removed often. -- tyler willis    |  talk   to me  06:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete- spam magnet, listcruft and there's already a category doing an adequate job. The El Reyko 07:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 14:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Thorpe | talk 14:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. --Domthedude001 20:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nom said it all. TH 09:02, 24 April 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.