67:
material. The other keep was the article's author and then there was the nom. Second, the sources that were provided that convinced the one !vote to change their vote, while not the most comprehensive are very reliable sources and speak to the value of the product. To quote one of the articles,
66:
I was asked about my closing this as a keep on my talk page, thus I decided to take a second closer look at the AfD and stand behind my original stance. First, I think it is meaningful that a person who originally !voted to delete changed his !vote to keep. Essentially, his !vote was the most
261:
This is what I originally searched, and then reported as seeing nothing but the source already in the article. If I'm missing something (or just not looking hard enough), please point it out. Does the second reference convey anything more? If so, I may reconsider, however, I couldn't open the
69:
the launch of the nftables alpha has barely been mentioned by the press. That's somewhat surprising, considering the new software will represent the biggest change to Linux firewalling since the introduction of iptables in
301::P), and a number of non-English ones. You can open the presentation with Open Office or MS Office 2007 (SP2) - it has some interesting information, but nothing really related to assessing notability. ·
72:
The other articles seem to indicate that this is a fairly significant development for Linux. Thus, I having looked at this in closer depth, I stand by the original close.---
184:
153:
298:
17:
278:
317:- Notability is light, as sources are hard to find ("the launch of the nftables alpha has barely been mentioned by the press"
318:
294:
120:
115:
418:
36:
124:
286:
107:
417:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
376:
352:- replaces iptables as the engine of Linux firewalls. Compare similar software on various Unix systems:
305:
252:
81:
57:
392:: Requested or not, it still needs "significant coverage in reliable sources" to show notability. –
401:
380:
336:
326:
309:
273:
263:
256:
238:
228:
199:
173:
86:
397:
195:
169:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
373:
322:
302:
249:
223:
if you want to use those as well). The only source I can find is already in the references (
245:
220:
216:
74:
50:
369:
331:
282:
268:
233:
227:), and nothing else turns up. I have no clue what the second of the two references is.
212:
161:
365:
111:
393:
290:
191:
165:
141:
357:
361:
353:
103:
95:
248:. The second reference in the article is a conference presentation. ·
224:
411:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
148:
137:
133:
129:
325:posted are of enough to sway my mind. Nice job. :)
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
421:). No further edits should be made to this page.
185:list of Software-related deletion discussions
8:
179:
48:although it looks rather weak to me... ---
183:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
368:. The article was also requested at
244:You can find a few similar mentions
24:
160:Non-notable software - fails
1:
438:
62:00:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
297:(heh, Fyodor looks a bit
414:Please do not modify it.
402:01:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
381:01:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
337:02:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
310:01:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
274:02:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
257:01:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
239:20:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
200:20:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
174:20:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
87:04:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
321:) but the sources
44:The result was
202:
188:
429:
416:
323:User:Naive cynic
211:- Looks to fail
189:
151:
145:
127:
77:
53:
34:
437:
436:
432:
431:
430:
428:
427:
426:
425:
419:deletion review
412:
335:
272:
237:
147:
118:
102:
99:
75:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
435:
433:
424:
423:
407:
406:
405:
404:
384:
383:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
341:
340:
339:
329:
315:Change to Keep
283:Linux Magazine
266:
231:
204:
203:
158:
157:
98:
93:
91:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
434:
422:
420:
415:
409:
408:
403:
399:
395:
391:
388:
387:
386:
385:
382:
378:
375:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
351:
348:
338:
333:
328:
324:
320:
316:
313:
312:
311:
307:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
277:
276:
275:
270:
265:
260:
259:
258:
254:
251:
247:
243:
242:
241:
240:
235:
230:
226:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
205:
201:
197:
193:
186:
182:
178:
177:
176:
175:
171:
167:
163:
155:
150:
143:
139:
135:
131:
126:
122:
117:
113:
109:
105:
101:
100:
97:
94:
92:
89:
88:
85:
84:
83:
79:
78:
71:
65:
61:
60:
59:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
413:
410:
389:
349:
314:
291:Heise Online
208:
207:
180:
159:
90:
82:
80:
73:
68:
63:
58:
56:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
262:document.
76:Balloonman
52:Balloonman
64:Follow-up
362:iptables
154:View log
104:Nftables
96:Nftables
394:ukexpat
390:Comment
192:ukexpat
166:ukexpat
121:protect
116:history
319:source
299:freaky
221:WP:ORG
217:WP:WEB
209:Delete
149:delete
125:delete
377:cynic
374:Naive
370:WP:RA
332:βǃʘʘɱ
306:cynic
303:Naive
269:βǃʘʘɱ
253:cynic
250:Naive
234:βǃʘʘɱ
152:) – (
142:views
134:watch
130:links
70:2001.
46:kept.
16:<
398:talk
372:. ·
358:ipfw
350:Keep
246:here
225:this
215:(or
213:WP:N
196:talk
181:Note
170:talk
162:WP:N
138:logs
112:talk
108:edit
354:ipf
327:Lәo
293:),
285:),
264:Lәo
229:Lәo
190:--
400:)
379:·
366:pf
364:,
360:,
356:,
308:·
255:·
198:)
187:.
172:)
164:.
140:|
136:|
132:|
128:|
123:|
119:|
114:|
110:|
396:(
334:)
330:(
295:_
289:(
287:_
281:(
279:_
271:)
267:(
236:)
232:(
219:/
194:(
168:(
156:)
146:(
144:)
106:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.