Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nftables

:The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was kept. although it looks rather weak to me... ---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 00:40, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Follow-up 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 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, 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 2001. 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.---Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 04:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

=[[Nftables]]=

:{{la|Nftables}} ([{{fullurl:Nftables|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nftables}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Non-notable software - fails WP:N. ukexpat (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

:Delete - Looks to fail WP:N (or WP:WEB/WP:ORG if you want to use those as well). The only source I can find is already in the references ([http://lwn.net/Articles/324989/ this]), and nothing else turns up. I have no clue what the second of the two references is. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 20:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

:: You can find a few similar mentions [http://www.google.com/search?as_epq=nftables&num=20 here]. The second reference in the article is a conference presentation. · Naive cynic · 01:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

:::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 document. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 02:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

:::: [http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/New-Kernel-Firewall-Nftables-to-Succeed-Netfilter _] (Linux Magazine), [http://www.h-online.com/security/New-firewall-for-the-Linux-kernel--/news/112897 _] (Heise Online), [http://risky.biz/news_and_opinion/patrick-gray/2009-03-26/news-linux-gets-new-firewall _] (heh, Fyodor looks a bit freaky :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. · Naive cynic · 01:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

:::::Change to Keep - Notability is light, as sources are hard to find ("the launch of the nftables alpha has barely been mentioned by the press"[http://risky.biz/news_and_opinion/patrick-gray/2009-03-26/news-linux-gets-new-firewall source]) but the sources User:Naive cynic posted are of enough to sway my mind. Nice job. :) Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 02:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

: Keep - replaces iptables as the engine of Linux firewalls. Compare similar software on various Unix systems: ipf, ipfw, iptables, pf. The article was also requested at WP:RA. · Naive cynic · 01:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

:*Comment: Requested or not, it still needs "significant coverage in reliable sources" to show notability. – ukexpat (talk) 01:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.