Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comodo Internet Security: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:40, 9 March 2010

Comodo Internet Security

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete non-notable software. It's claim to fame seems to be two short reviews in PCWorld and PCMagazine. --Bejnar (talk) 21:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think that [PC Magazine review http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2333811,00.asp] is quite substantial, with 8 webpages. (Perhaps you only saw the overview?) Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 00:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It has a fair amount of users around...a couple million, according to a post I saw lately by the CEO on the forum. You think it needs more sources then? Or does someone need to write a long review about something for it to be in Wikipedia? --LaserWraith (talk) 02:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You got it. A couple of someones need to write substantial reviews about it, and publish the reviews in reliable publications (electronic or hard-copy doesn't matter, fact-checking does). That is a large part of what makes an encyclopedia different from the news or Internet blogs. --Bejnar (talk) 03:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here are two more reviews about CIS, and the new beta v. 4. Comodo Internet Security 4 Review, Comodo Internet Security Review. --LaserWraith (talk) 14:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment found a couple of short reviews in finnish magazine MikroBitti: [1][2] (preview, full article only for subscribers). Not sure if it is enough to show notability however; both mentions are on the magazines "monthly recommended free software" article.(edit: forgot signature MKFI (talk) 09:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]
Keep The PC Magazine and PCWorld reviews establish notability. (And I've added a "reviews" section to this article.) The article does need cleanup. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I do think it needs a bit of cleanup. Just not deletion...I will try and clean it up, and maybe recruit some friends. --LaserWraith (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or redirect, sources seems to satisfy minimal requirements. --SF007 (talk) 16:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - does a plain vanilla Review of a product denote it as Notable? Each must be interpreted. Were they Paid to conduct their Review? Was the Product maker linked in any way to the Reviewers? Would every product mentioned in Consumers Digest be notable? Would a Review of a Band lend the band Notability? Just because a Product has been looked at by someone, does not make it actually WP:Notable. Exit2DOS ^{• Ctrl • Alt • Del} 01:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, Exit2DOS, are you suggesting that PCWorld and/or PCMagazine are not WP:independent in this case? Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 09:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Usually most reviews and content on the internet makes money in some way or another. If all content was not counted because someone made money off of it, not much would be left. In addition, people are more likely to review popular products and so draw more visitors to their page. Though a reviewer may have some bias, they are less likely to review an unpopular product than a popular one. --LaserWraith (talk) 14:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it and let these guys clean it up a bit! Their are more than just "[a] couple someones" running Comodo Internet Security; deleting this article would be an immense disappointment! It's notable software and with this recent release of version 4 one could say with utmost certainty, we will see more reviews! If any of you shall still stumble in doubt? I highly recommend you run Comodo on your own PC and review it for yourselves! So many people past, present and future have and will rely on this article! Respectfully and very sincerely, --RunTrax (talk) 05:08, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 *'''Comment''' - does a plain vanilla [[Review]] of a product denote it as Notable? Each must be interpreted. Were they Paid to conduct their Review? Was the Product maker linked in any way to the Reviewers? Would every product mentioned in [[Consumers Digest]] be notable? Would a Review of a Band lend the band Notability? Just because a Product has been looked at by someone, does not make it actually [[WP:N]]otable. <font style="background-color:Thistle;font-weight:bold;color:Black;">Exit2DOS </font><small><sup> • [[User:Exit2DOS2000|Ctrl]] • [[User Talk:Exit2DOS2000|Alt]] • [[Special:Contributions/Exit2DOS2000|Del]]</sup></small> 01:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 :* To clarify, Exit2DOS, are you suggesting that PCWorld and/or PCMagazine are not [[WP:independent]] in this case? [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] ([[User talk:Jodi.a.schneider|talk]]) 09:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
-:* Usually most reviews and content on the internet makes money in some way or another.  If all content was not counted because someone made money off of it, not much would be left.  In addition, people are more likely to review popular products and so draw more visitors to their page.  Though a reviewer may have some bias, they are less likely to review an unpopular product than a popular one.
+:* Usually most reviews and content on the internet makes money in some way or another.  If all content was not counted because someone made money off of it, not much would be left.  In addition, people are more likely to review popular products and so draw more visitors to their page.  Though a reviewer may have some bias, they are less likely to review an unpopular product than a popular one. --[[User:Jeremysbost|LaserWraith]] ([[User talk:Jeremysbost|talk]]) 14:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' it and let these guys clean it up a bit! Their are more than just "[a] couple someones" running Comodo Internet Security; deleting this article would be an immense disappointment! It's notable software and with this recent release of version 4 one could say with utmost certainty, we will see more reviews! If any of you shall still stumble in doubt? I highly recommend you run Comodo on your own PC and review it for yourselves! So many people past, present and future have and will rely on this article! Respectfully and very sincerely, --[[User:RunTrax|RunTrax]] ([[User talk:RunTrax|talk]]) 05:08, 9 March 2010 (UTC)