Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L2walker

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. Tagged {{db-afd}}. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

L2walker[edit]

A cheat program for a game having no assertion of notability Delete Steve _(Slf67)^talk 09:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:SOFTWARE, zero news ghits. MER-C 10:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per failing WP:SOFTWARE. May I point out WP:SOFTWARE is currently in development. MER-C, just remember ghits are not always a good guide to the notability of the article. Yuser31415 (Review me!) 00:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see, I see. I misunderstood; thinking you meant the game had no assertion of notability. I still don't think it should be deleted as it's relevant and technically correct. Maybe merged with the Lineage 2 article? Due to its subject matter, it would fit perfectly in Section 5 entitled Botting.
- How about the fact that l2Walker allowed for some of the most profitable real money trading companies like IGE to become not mere 'gamers with bucks on ebay' but full-fledged businesses?
Great references! Unfortunately they are for Lineage II (which I do not doubt is a notable subject) and not L2Walker which is the subject of this AfD. --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 09:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A huge problem with tracking down l2walker usage or stories about it come in part from the fact that most people (even players who use the program for non-monetary purposes) will deny using it, since even suggesting that you might use it could get you banned. Most forums dedicated to the game actively censor discussion about the program, and the official lineage 2 forum policy dictates that any discussion about it can get your thread locked or deleted, with your account having the same done to it. Mentioning the program any other way than referring to it in the third person (That program, The program, IT, the program which shall not be named, etc) can get your post edited and/or deleted. NCsoft NA representatives in official threads on the subject even refrain from mentioning it, except by slight reference:

1. Gameguard works! No tool will ever stop all bots from working. Gameguard has stopped many 3rd party programs from working. Yes, I know which one it has not stopped.' Look at it this way, if there is only one enemy for me to combat, it is much better than 20 (amount of high level botting programs before GG.) - Emphasis added [1]

Please remember to send any reports about specific programs through the "Ask a Question" link in the Support Center – do not post the names of these programs. We are aware of most programs in use, but please send us any additional information you feel might be helpful. [2]

l2walker is infamous in that regard, because it *is* the one that hasn't been stopped, and has not been stopped during the last several years of Lineage 2's existence. Its kept the real money traders in business in lineage, and kept legitimate players from competing normally against others. In short, its usage has been a constant plague upon the players of Lineage 2. Removing this article would just serve to further censor a product that, for good or worse, affects the majority of the million-strong player base for this game across the world.

Finally, talk about the program has been published. When I get home I will find the actual article, but its use was mentioned in a gaming magazine article about real money trading during 2005, specifically mentioning Lineage 2. 12.110.71.30 22:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Koweja 23:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Either the article makes no claim to notability at all or I blinked at the wrong time. The Kinslayer 10:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.--RWR8189 07:03, 26 December 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.