Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OllyDbg

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. Nom seems to agree with only comment, which was Keep. (non-admin closure) Monty ₈₄₅ 18:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OllyDbg[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lacks significant secondary coverage. — anndelion ❋ 20:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - OllyDbg appears to be the tool of choice for many of those analysing viruses, or reverse engineering software. Coverage in the form of books appear to be readily available. Grey Hat Hacking has a section on this tool. Reverse engineering code with IDA Pro states it "has long been the staple of reversing communities". Reversing:secrets of reverse engineering although not previewable clearly has a section on it. Malware Forensics has coverage as well stating that it is "used by many malware analysts". There's more, but that should be sufficient to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 19:01, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've used the tool infrequently (prefer IDA Pro), believe it or not, but I guess I wasn't very thorough before AfDing this -- the IDA Pro book doesn't give much info, but the others are valid, so I'll chalk this up to ibuprofen and/or general incompetence. Mea culpa. — anndelion ❋ 21:44, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 27 April 2011 (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.