Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dotfuscator
despite what looks like / editing): A free version has been incorporated under licence into Visual Studio since 2003, and if that were all, it could redirect to Microsoft Visual Studio. The separate professional version, however, means that a standalone article appears warranted. Incorporation into a company article might be an option except that the product appears far more notable than the company. https://visualstudiomagazine.com/articles/2009/08/01/preemptive-dotfuscator-secures-code.aspx Review 1. http://www.activewin.com/reviews/software/devl/vsnet2003/features2.shtml Review 2. http://www.crn.com/reviews/blogs/192201356/review-preemptive-way-to-obfuscate-net-apps.htm Review 3. https://adtmag.com/articles/2004/01/23/review-dotfuscator.aspx Review 4 https://visualstudiomagazine.com/Articles/2011/07/01/pfven_App-Analytics.aspx Relevant article. In a https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=dotfuscator number of books including https://books.google.com/books?id=Kjt39v8AbQkC&pg=PA941 this and https://books.google.com.au/books?id=5ISfkblE9AUC&pg=PA868 this
— User:Hydronium, 10:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:COI||WP:SPA (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)