Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BloodhoundV2 Trojan Horse

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. NW (Talk) 00:07, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BloodhoundV2 Trojan Horse[edit]

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

I was originally looking for an introduction to the Bloodhound™ technology found in Norton AntiVirus, but I feel that in its current state, this article is not particularly well-written. Even if it were rewritten completely, its title seems rather unintuitive.
(Note: the edit by the dynamic IP address 70.89.99.102 that you may see in the article's revision history is actually mine.) Bwrs (talk) 05:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/redirect to Norton Antivirus. This seems to be rather confused essay on an otherwise notable topic (the algorithm used by Norton Antivirus to detect trojans). Although it has already been tagged for merger to the main article, I see no discussion the talk page. But, I don't see salvageable material in this article either. You cold have been WP:BOLD and just redirected it to the main article. Pcap ping 09:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Leave a redirect to a sensible article(probably Norton Antivirus as a courtesy to those who've bookmarked or linked to it. --HamburgerRadio (talk) 11:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment from nom.: A more sensible name for the redirect would be Bloodhound (software), although I think that Bloodhound (software) is a worthy subject in and of itself. Bwrs (talk) 05:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 09:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete small part of a large software application. Doesn't need its own article or redirect. 16x9 (talk) 04:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reason for this duplicative article, anything worth saying should be said at Norton Antivirus. It is not independently notable. I see no need for redirect since the title is unmöglich. --Bejnar (talk) 01:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please modify it ONLY if Necessary. 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.