Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Office Password Recovery

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was COPYVIO; VfD inapplicable

[edit] Advanced Office Password Recovery

Blatant ad for a non-encyclopedic software package. Page created by an anon whose only other edit was to add this software package to a list of certain types of software on another page. Katefan0 22:18, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

It's a copyvio. I'll deal with it accordingly. RickK 22:23, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

There are three other password recovery programs at Wikipedia (l0phtcrack for example). What's wrong with this one ?

As I said above, it's a copyright violation. Unless you own the rights to information at http://www.elcomsoft.com/aopr.html, you can't copy it to Wikipedia. RickK 22:28, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and delete any existence of copyvio. With over 45,700 hits on google this passes "the test". [1] GRider\^talk 00:01, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Rewrite. The original author of this article needs to recover his lost or forgotten writing skills on how to avoid copyright violations. Zzyzx11 00:55, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, rewrite and expand, passes Google test. Megan1967 02:51, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I don't think the google test is relevant for this one. The first few pages are all software download sites. The few that I checked did not show it as heavily downloaded nor did the review sites give it particularly high marks. I'm inclined to delete unless stronger evidence can be found. Rossami (talk) 05:15, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Are the people voting keep aware of the way copyright violations are handled? The article has to be deleted so that the copyright violation is removed from the history. Then the article can be rewritten without the copyvio. There is nothing to vote on until the article has gone through the copyvio procedure. RickK 05:23, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • I can't speak for others, but I was trying to express the opinion that whether or not it is deleted as a copyvio, the topic does not appear to meet our generally accepted standards of inclusion and that, therefore, no one should waste their time writing a non-copyvio version. Rossami
• Keep, seems notable. JamesBurns 08:02, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.