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 of the debate was keep. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 01:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of trojan horses[edit]

Same issue as with list of computer viruses. The number of Trojan horses is far too expansive to ever be complete, and there is no reason to have this list when a category works perfectly fine. Trafton 05:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 16:17, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep same with viruses. -- JJay 23:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please "always explain your reasoning." See Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion#Discussion.
    brenneman^(t)(c) 23:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: for reasons see above. -- JJay 23:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, use category instead. --LesleyW 23:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per JJay 80.177.152.156 15:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep just as the case with the previous vote. Certainly the list of trojan horses needs work, but it's a starting point. A-Day 21:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Categories exist. Pilatus 21:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Same issies with list of computer viruses this should be kept. Please do not waiste my time with more similar votes. It is beginning to get personal and I am starting to get annoyed which really is not a good thing. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for same reasons as my vote in List of computer viruses. --Revolución (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Danny 00:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The majority of lists are "far to expansive to ever be complete", but there's no reason we can't have an incomplete list. If it gets too big, split it up into multiple pages. As for the "category works perfectly fine" claim, categories don't list nonexistent articles. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-01-1 00:47
• Keep- A lot of work went into creating this article, and because it provides useful information, I think it should not be deleted. Even if outdated it should remain as a useful reference.--Christopher 01:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- per above --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 02:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- as for list of computer viruses. The damn thing needs a lot of work though. It should only include trojans that are notable; many are just variants of others. Othersie this list will become unmanageable. Reyk 02:39, 1 January 2006 (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.