Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hidden Dragon Trojan Horse Virus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hidden Dragon Trojan Horse Virus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No third-party coverage, partially written like a how-to guide, and states "recently created", which is a) inappropriate for an encyclopedia article and b) an indication that this is probably not notable. — Timneu22 · talk 16:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Sounds like a pile of horsebleep. "As mentioned before, computers are not prone to the virus if their bandwidth stays constant and does not significantly drop, as when it drops, the security lessens and more viruses are allowed to enter." Really? "This virus is able to spread to other computers in the network of the infected computer, thus it is advisable to disconnect the infected computer from the current network, and when past bandwidth is achieved, it should be reconnected and removed if possible." So with no network, how does one achieve the past bandwidth? And in any case, neither F-secure nor McAfee have it listed in their virus databases. -- Whpq (talk) 16:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- So it's the Speed of viruses? Well, I can't find any sources for it, so delete. Reach Out to the Truth 18:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No sources mention this. Google search couldn't find it. Even the one reference in the article doesn't mention it. Hoax? First Light (talk) 14:58, 31 July 2010 (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.