This article was nominated for deletion on 14 November 2016. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Websites: Computing This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. Media This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite NPOV : Content (media and publishing) Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper Other : Answer requests for comments Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Make page complie with wikipedia rules so it is not an orphan page anymore. --66.67.123.157 (talk) 21:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any analysis available that shows that the tools provided by this site are not rogue anti-spyware themselves? Nicolas1981 (talk) 10:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any reports that this is the case; the site seems generally reliable. Asking for a negative source saying explicitly that the tools are not malicious is not reasonable. Pol098 (talk) 11:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just undid some edits by 122.105.151.190 dated 13 April 2015. I'm replying under since this is a similar question. It is a well known fact that antivirus/malware/spyware/etc programs tend to falsely identify each other as malware. The tools they use on BleepingComputer and other such sites are for the most part developed for free by well respected members of the malware removal community. Is it possible that one of the authors might do a 180 and load his/her program up with malware? Sure, nothing is ever 100%. But I've certainly never seen a report of this happening. As Pol098 said it is unreasonable to expect indepdent third party audits of every tool. Heck, look at how much it cost and how long it took to audit TrueCrypt. Ckrunch (talk) 04:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does this page comes off as an advertisement? All links mostly to the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.23.71.76 (talk) 14:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The page does seem a bit promotional. Notability is currently an issue, and I've tagged it as such. The PC World refs are the only independent ones, and only mention Bleeping Computer for a sentence or two, which does not constitute significant coverage.Dialectric (talk) 07:10, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article overhauled to remove "promotional" feel. Rylheh (talk) 23:42, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bleeping Computer website won't allow me to register and won't respond to "Contact Us" so what's the point of this website? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.95.62.99 (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bleeping Computer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223224636/http://www.bleepingcomputer.com:80/forums/index.php?act=members to http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/index.php?act=members
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090804060323/http://www.uniteagainstmalware.com:80/schools.php to http://www.uniteagainstmalware.com/schools.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:04, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]