The result was Withdrawn. For now. Web reviews of this software do exist. The article will be tagged accordingly. Non-admin closing. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 14:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested prod. The article initially stated that it had been created to make up for a lack of documentation on Hackvertor, a statement that has been removed along with the prod notice. Delete. Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 12:59, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the reasoning but c'mon I thought the idea of wikipedia was to collaborate on topics. Hackvertor contains documentation but it is a open source project I can't dedicate huge chunks of time, I was hoping to get Hackvertor users to help me improve the wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hackvertor (talk • contribs) 13:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hackvertor is notable within the security community, it doesn't make the news because I don't have a marketing budget as it is open source. That last sentence made no sense I'm confused. comment added by Hackvertor (talk • contribs)
This article provide interesting and relevant information on this freeware : its origin, its purpose, how it can be used. Granted there is a lot to do on the styling, but it still provides informations which I think has its place on Wikipedia, maybe you could consider removing this Afd and instead use a styling notice. Also note that even if not very well known, this freeware has had its reviews on the web ([1]) which make it notable to more than the author himself. Olivier Jaquemet (talk) 13:39, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]