![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I noticed that this page has been deleted previously before creating it, but I thought I'd give it another shot. I am in no way associated with the product or company. Merely someone that uses the product.
Reasons for adding: Via Google Trends if you compare CCleaner against "Spybot" and "Ad-aware" it in some cases rates higher than Ad-ware and tends to be a close third. Both Ad-aware and Spybot have pages on Wikipedia.
Via Google News CCleaner has 600+ news articles that use its name.
Via Alexa.com if you compare ccleaner.com, lavasoftusa.com, safer-networking.org which are the sites for CCleaner, Ad-aware, and Spybot respectively you will find that CCleaner.com is currently rating ABOVE the other two in reach, page rank, and page views.
Its parent company which is Piriform has released a second product, Recuva, and is currently working on a "defrag tool" according to the Products page.
CCleaner is also mentioned in one other Wikipedia article: Windows Startup Process.
I believe that while CCleaner may not be extraordinarily important in the grand scheme of things it is important enough to warrant the space for an article.
Thanks. -- Campbecf 21:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Keep, it is helping users who are inexperienced with computers with maintaning it. Emva 21:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
For unknown reasons, the developer Piriform Ltd. refuses to publish its business address and identity of the developers or managers which is quite strange for a company offering a software downloaded by >275 million users. Pretty strange and I wonder why any of the major magazine has never discussed this issue. What, if CCleaner is a giant scam? 91.9.224.22 ( talk) 21:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
17 CAVENDISH SQUARE LONDON UNITED KINGDOM W1G 0PH Company No. 05565433 Widefox ( talk) 13:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I dont get it. Dont you see that Piriform is hiding their business address? It stares at you if you lookup their webpage orif you lookup their anonymous domain registration and the anonymous company setup. And you guys sit there debating about the word "believe"... Wikinerds...*sigh* 24.119.59.138 ( talk) 01:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Should the fact that the manufacturer ( Piriform) does not list its physical location anywhere on the internet be included in the article? See above section for evidence provided. — Vanderdecken∴ ∫ ξ φ 11:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I removed this unreferenced claim. This really needs a reference, else I would consider that CCleaner is correctly doing its job of finding malware. "There are several reported instances of systems that have been infected by the Vundo Trojan (also known as Virtumonde) after downloading CCleaner. citation needed" Widefox ( talk) 13:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Has this general advice about Windows/prefetch got anything to do with this software article? What is the need for it here, in this article?
Wikipedia does not give general random advice on various software. Unless anyone has a good reason why we should keep the section I would suggest removing it.
FFMG (
talk)
16:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I saw something at the top of the artyicle saying it may be deleted, dated November 2010. I vote to keep it, Its used by lots of people and has a good reputation. 92.29.112.73 ( talk) 14:05, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
JJJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.164.53.2 ( talk) 06:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I have a netbook running Windows XP with an Atom N435 and this "highly recommended" program named CCleaner crashed my system. I do not recommend it. -- 217.82.177.88 ( talk) 08:31, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
The fact that this recieved 5/5 stars on C|net is completely irellevant. Their reliability is really not what it was 5 years ago. Some developers have even caught download.com (a sub site of C|Net) bundling spyware with their legitimate software. [1] [2]. They appear to give any software a good review that pays for it. C|Net has also recently recinded it's "Anti-Spyware" policy. Therefore, I would suggest that they be removed as a credible source of relieability of the software.
References
Secondly, this entry reads like an advertisement. It cites only one refrence outside the developers website, and that is to C|net which as I mentioned above, appears to be paid to say good things about their advertisers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rtuite ( talk • contribs) 21:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
On 12 March 2017 I added a section describing licensing, privacy and Piriform's protective policies on user data. It's visible in the article's View history tab. On 13 March 2017 Sbmeirow reviewed the article, deleted some content, but kept the licensing section. On 2 April 2017 Nthep did likewise. However on 10 May 2017 Train2104 deleted the licensing section with a comment that it was "a needless in-depth critical analysis." I don't think it was "critical analysis," it simply noted CCleaner's terms, without critique. "Needless" is in the eye of the beholder, but it's a brief section describing what CCleaner does. I think most readers understand that free and inexpensive software like CCleaner may use users' data, so description of what data are used and how uses are limited is quite important in understanding a product. I respect that Train2104 does not need the section, but Nthep and Sbmeirow apparently agreed with me it was appropriate. Numbersinstitute ( talk) 17:10, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
The old name for CCleaner was Crap Cleaner. Notice the EXTRA "C" in CCleaner. This is correct. Just because there isn't a reference, doesn't mean it's wrong. Yeah, we need to find a reference from some old website before the newer company took it over, but that doesn't mean it should automatically be removed. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 12:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Should we report on the recent hack of CCleaner v. 5.33.6162 or CCleaner Cloud v. 1.07.3191, which requires an uninstall? [1]
Since there had been a previous hack in 2009, perhaps we want a succinct section on CCleaner hacks.
The current - most recent - version is 5.34.6207. [2] MaynardClark ( talk) 03:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I noticed that this page has been deleted previously before creating it, but I thought I'd give it another shot. I am in no way associated with the product or company. Merely someone that uses the product.
Reasons for adding: Via Google Trends if you compare CCleaner against "Spybot" and "Ad-aware" it in some cases rates higher than Ad-ware and tends to be a close third. Both Ad-aware and Spybot have pages on Wikipedia.
Via Google News CCleaner has 600+ news articles that use its name.
Via Alexa.com if you compare ccleaner.com, lavasoftusa.com, safer-networking.org which are the sites for CCleaner, Ad-aware, and Spybot respectively you will find that CCleaner.com is currently rating ABOVE the other two in reach, page rank, and page views.
Its parent company which is Piriform has released a second product, Recuva, and is currently working on a "defrag tool" according to the Products page.
CCleaner is also mentioned in one other Wikipedia article: Windows Startup Process.
I believe that while CCleaner may not be extraordinarily important in the grand scheme of things it is important enough to warrant the space for an article.
Thanks. -- Campbecf 21:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Keep, it is helping users who are inexperienced with computers with maintaning it. Emva 21:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
For unknown reasons, the developer Piriform Ltd. refuses to publish its business address and identity of the developers or managers which is quite strange for a company offering a software downloaded by >275 million users. Pretty strange and I wonder why any of the major magazine has never discussed this issue. What, if CCleaner is a giant scam? 91.9.224.22 ( talk) 21:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
17 CAVENDISH SQUARE LONDON UNITED KINGDOM W1G 0PH Company No. 05565433 Widefox ( talk) 13:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I dont get it. Dont you see that Piriform is hiding their business address? It stares at you if you lookup their webpage orif you lookup their anonymous domain registration and the anonymous company setup. And you guys sit there debating about the word "believe"... Wikinerds...*sigh* 24.119.59.138 ( talk) 01:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Should the fact that the manufacturer ( Piriform) does not list its physical location anywhere on the internet be included in the article? See above section for evidence provided. — Vanderdecken∴ ∫ ξ φ 11:43, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
I removed this unreferenced claim. This really needs a reference, else I would consider that CCleaner is correctly doing its job of finding malware. "There are several reported instances of systems that have been infected by the Vundo Trojan (also known as Virtumonde) after downloading CCleaner. citation needed" Widefox ( talk) 13:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Has this general advice about Windows/prefetch got anything to do with this software article? What is the need for it here, in this article?
Wikipedia does not give general random advice on various software. Unless anyone has a good reason why we should keep the section I would suggest removing it.
FFMG (
talk)
16:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I saw something at the top of the artyicle saying it may be deleted, dated November 2010. I vote to keep it, Its used by lots of people and has a good reputation. 92.29.112.73 ( talk) 14:05, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
JJJ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.164.53.2 ( talk) 06:50, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
I have a netbook running Windows XP with an Atom N435 and this "highly recommended" program named CCleaner crashed my system. I do not recommend it. -- 217.82.177.88 ( talk) 08:31, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
The fact that this recieved 5/5 stars on C|net is completely irellevant. Their reliability is really not what it was 5 years ago. Some developers have even caught download.com (a sub site of C|Net) bundling spyware with their legitimate software. [1] [2]. They appear to give any software a good review that pays for it. C|Net has also recently recinded it's "Anti-Spyware" policy. Therefore, I would suggest that they be removed as a credible source of relieability of the software.
References
Secondly, this entry reads like an advertisement. It cites only one refrence outside the developers website, and that is to C|net which as I mentioned above, appears to be paid to say good things about their advertisers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rtuite ( talk • contribs) 21:10, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
On 12 March 2017 I added a section describing licensing, privacy and Piriform's protective policies on user data. It's visible in the article's View history tab. On 13 March 2017 Sbmeirow reviewed the article, deleted some content, but kept the licensing section. On 2 April 2017 Nthep did likewise. However on 10 May 2017 Train2104 deleted the licensing section with a comment that it was "a needless in-depth critical analysis." I don't think it was "critical analysis," it simply noted CCleaner's terms, without critique. "Needless" is in the eye of the beholder, but it's a brief section describing what CCleaner does. I think most readers understand that free and inexpensive software like CCleaner may use users' data, so description of what data are used and how uses are limited is quite important in understanding a product. I respect that Train2104 does not need the section, but Nthep and Sbmeirow apparently agreed with me it was appropriate. Numbersinstitute ( talk) 17:10, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
The old name for CCleaner was Crap Cleaner. Notice the EXTRA "C" in CCleaner. This is correct. Just because there isn't a reference, doesn't mean it's wrong. Yeah, we need to find a reference from some old website before the newer company took it over, but that doesn't mean it should automatically be removed. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 12:34, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Should we report on the recent hack of CCleaner v. 5.33.6162 or CCleaner Cloud v. 1.07.3191, which requires an uninstall? [1]
Since there had been a previous hack in 2009, perhaps we want a succinct section on CCleaner hacks.
The current - most recent - version is 5.34.6207. [2] MaynardClark ( talk) 03:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)