LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 04:39, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Reply It appears the article could use to be expanded, not deleted. It is definitely notable, even given what you said. Retran ( talk) 04:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Reply Interesting comment, but it was one of the first and it is still going. I will probably nominate this in AfD in a week or so if I hear nothing in this talk section. Filtering software that is installed on the end-user machine has fallen out of favor replaced with solutions that are integrated into the OS, or solutions that are further up the line (ie: on the firewall device). This is a private company, and mostly one of the "has-beens". Its hard to find any current coverage in the media on it, and even the older articles aren't very numerous. Products like NetNanny might have been notable in the earlier days of the internet, but its not really much of a player at all anymore. There seems to be a potential issue here with notability. LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 05:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Reply That's where the issue becomes soapboxy, when it starts leaking onto other pages where it does not belong. Imagine if each wiki page for each one repeated the same criticism section for the same issue generally. There are dozens of content control products. Further, contributions to the issue should be made there. Further, on the page for the issue generally, the issue is discussed. Retran ( talk) 05:15, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Reply Agree, but this page is about Net Nanny, not about the issue generally. Do best-of articles regarding products Wikipedia never contain criticism about a product-type in general on a product belonging to that type? I feel that would be a more simple rationale to use as to its appropriateness for inclusion, (not requiring eliciting intentions of the writing when its not very obvious). I'm not so sure that it so obvious that this criticism is "pure soapbox" so easily, as the issue represents a major circumvention in the purpose these products are purchased in the first place. At first thought, I figured its removal would mask notable and legitimate criticism, and since it was removed by an IP editor it drew suspicious of perhaps an edit by an individual with direct interest. I found it was deleted and added without any discussion even after being in the article for so long. ![]() LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 05:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Reply The history of this article's edits are pretty short, and I usually start there when I edit and clean-up. Further, the criticism was to content control software generally, and we link to that page, and it is discussed there, so efforts to push it into every related page are pure soapbox. The criticism cited made no mention of Net Nanny. ![]() Retran ( talk) 04:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC) Reply I removed it, not knowing it was previously removed. That's unacceptable when there's been obvious back-and-forth as to its appropriateness to being included. The last time it was deleted was by an anonymous user with a blank summary. As it happens, its been removed and re-added a few times. Any removal of this section should be discussed and defended in talk, or I will simply reverse the removal. I feel there is no reason not to include it, as it is discussed (especially with my new wording) in a neutral fact-driven way, with citations to a reliable secondary source. Please mention here why you feel the criticism section informing readers about a notable issue should be removed. ![]() ![]() Pornography Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography Template:WikiProject Pornography Pornography articles If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Software Wikipedia:WikiProject Software Template:WikiProject Software software articles This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. Software : Computing Stub‑class Low‑importance
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |