Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacKeeper
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 18:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
- MacKeeper (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Delete - This article contains some content that is written totally like an advertisement. Even though when people searches about MacKeeper they find a Wikipedia page about product, which create an good impact and anybody can be influenced to download the software/app. But no body should actually download it, as discussed and stated by biggest platforms, such as - iMore[1], etc. Preeti Sharma's Knowledge (talk) 09:17, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep Not a valid reason for deletion. Theroadislong (talk) 10:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep This is an absolutely frivolous request. The subject is notable and is cited.--Labattblueboy (talk) 10:32, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
" Keep. Not only because I use it myself, but also because it is a Notable product as witnessed by all the Web articles about it. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Notable for a standalone article as per WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCT, many reviews - see article. Also, see WP:ATD - editing is almost always preferable to deletion or stubification. Esquivalience t 15:02, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- keep how can you nominate it?C E (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep - as above, extensively referenced, clearly notable software. Misguided nomination.Dialectric (talk) 02:41, 29 April 2015 (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.