Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Captcha Breaker / Captcha Solver

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Captcha Breaker / Captcha Solver (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Personal essay and how-to guide. This could be a good, encyclopedic topic, but written in this way it is not useful. If there is any content worth preserving (although as far as I can tell there is not) it can be merged to the main Captcha article in a subsection on "Captcha breaking"; for now, though, there is no reason to have this article until someone is ready to approach it in an encyclopedic fashion. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree with Rjanag. While this could be a good topic, in its' current form it is nothing but a personal essay/how-to guide. Also of note is that one of the main contributors to this article seems to have a conflict of interest (check his user name with the url of the website cited in the references). -T'Shael, Lord of the Vulcans 14:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect to CAPTCHA#Circumvention. The current content of the article is too personal and not encyclopedic. The redirect is probably not suitable since the double title is not that intuitive. Lechatjaune (talk) 19:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It looks like CAPTCHA#Circumvention already has more information than this article does, so I don't see any need to merge content anymore. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 19:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unsuitable for Wikipedia. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I would suggest a merger to CAPTCHA#Circumvention, but per Rjanag that appears not to be needed. I don't see this title a useful term for a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 13:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge or Redirect: deletion does not seems to make sense. SF007 (talk) 23:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you explain why deletion doesn't make sense? rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • CAPTCHA seems to be considered a notable issue, right? So why not merge this? The information seems factual. I usually don't believe in simply deleting articles like this. Now if the concern is the legallity of the CAPTCHA breaking, then I do not oppose deletion. SF007 (talk) 13:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Like I said above, there is nothing here to merge. All the useful content is already in CAPTCHA#Circumvention, and the rest is just how-to stuff which Wikipedia should not have. There's no point leaving a redirect because it's not a plausible search term. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:06, 21 June 2009 (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.