Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Towelroot

:{{la|Towelroot}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Towelroot Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Towelroot}})

Old enough that if it was gonna make the news, it would have, but recent enough that you'd expect it to be all over the internet. And yet, it isn't, and I see minimal coverage of it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• Comment - Found [http://www.securityweek.com/towelroot-vulnerability-could-lead-attacks-android-devices-researcher this], [http://lifehacker.com/towelroot-roots-android-kitkat-devices-in-one-tap-no-p-1592226618 this], [http://www.ibtimes.com/geohot-towelroot-exploit-roots-galaxy-s5-devices-att-verizon-1602368 this] and [http://www.naldotech.com/why-your-phone-isnt-supported-by-towelroot/ this]. Oddly, as you say, its not all over the internet. That said, some notable coverage there (International Business Times for example). JT_dale^Talk~ 12:01, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
• Delete. Text and sources don't even assert, much less establish, notability, and the text is unredeemably POV. —Swpb^talk 15:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
• Speedy delete G12. Bald copyvio slapped together from two sources (in tag). Deadbeef 21:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

: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.