Not really a useful comment, either. Please explain why you think it's not useful.
I have to agree with andy_111's sentiment, he and others noted the row number / windowing function alternative, and additionally I think that with the warnings about SET ROWCOUNT's changing semantics, the original posted code is probably a trap for the unwary.
Also deleting dupes is sort of a FAQ and I don't think the author really covered the material, especially given what I've seen with a basic web search on the topic. Clearly the windowing functionality should have been mentioned, heck even Microsoft offers the selecting distinct into a temp table, deleting and reinserting as an option in one of their older pages. Given the shakey semantics lifetime of SET ROWCOUNT on updates, I think a decent effort should have discussed this, so I have to in general agree with andy_111's sentiment.
It looks like an old fashion article, doesn't it? For SQL 2000 or something.
Even with that, I like the insert distinct copies of the dupes into a temp table, remove the dupes, then reinsert back into the source if we're talking about non windowing function methods. Still yeah, a bit on the old fashioned side 🙂
Now that's the kind of disagreement I can respect instead of a useless "poop" bomb with no info like the original commment. 🙂 Glad he followed up after that.