Jump to content

Talk:fli4l

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 23:07, 1 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Stub" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Computing}}, {{WikiProject Linux}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Tagging

[edit]

I'm flagging this article NPOV and advert for, among others, the following:

  • The distribution is particularly notable
  • However, despite its age, the most recent release is very suitable for a basic firewall system, and remains customizable by its nature
  • extensive usage of second person and lack of encyclopedic distance both to the subject and the reader in general
  • overzealous list of features/advantages

Apart from that, general improvements of language appear necessary as well. 68.184.213.180 (talk) 21:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed PROD

[edit]

I removed the proposed deletion notification because this article is in the process of being rewritten based upon the german original article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.238.172 (talk) 13:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine, but it still doesn't have any references that show that the subject is notable. I'll wait until you are done and then we can re-assess whether it should be sent to WP:AFD. Is a week enough time to finish your work on it? - Ahunt (talk) 14:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I thought, I could do it on short notice but something came in between. I'll need more than a week. --Ajv39 (talk) 14:41, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, I'll check back at the end of the month then. - Ahunt (talk) 15:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Book

[edit]

Ahunt wrote (see History): usually called "further reading" on Wikipedia, fixed. It is not clear that this book even mentions this subject however, needs a review

Okay I see that. I'd like to suggest then that given that we know what it says that the book should be used as a ref, rather than "further reading" as it strengthens the argument that the topic is notable. - Ahunt (talk) 15:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[x] done - Ajv39 (talk) 20:09, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Super. I think we have the bare minimum to argue WP:N now. I'll see what else I can find. - Ahunt (talk) 13:20, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I added a couple of refs, more for would helpful, though. - Ahunt (talk) 15:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! I added some references too from the German magazine c't (Editor Heinz Heise). There should certainly exist more useful refs (Google has 617000 hits on "fli4l"). - Ajv39 (talk) 21:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I found lots of hits as well and it is a unique name, but, of course most turn out to be blogs, spam, forums and other not-very-useful results. It is always a matter of finding the wheat in the chaff. - Ahunt (talk) 22:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]