Talk:Kerio Technologies

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

Discussion[edit]

I think the article needs a rewrite. It looks like an advertisement. Meneth 17:09, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the one who originally posted the info on Kerio/Tiny Firewalls (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tiny_and_Kerio_firewalls&oldid=149515192), and as you can see on that old (now deleted) page's discussion/talk page, I did it for the following reasons:

"Note: I created this page mainly since (a) it's hard to get a grip on which versions of these firewalls that exist and since they've switched ownership so many times, (b) since there's hardly anything on the subject on Wikipedia, and (c) since the free version is very useful and should interest many Wikipedia users. If anyone cares to deep dive into technical specifications please do so, and then put headline "Development" or "Versions" or something on what I wrote. I will also try to fix redirection for related pages, but I'm new at this."

Since then my post has been altered and moved several times. A bit funny that a firewall that's been lacking a wiki page for 6 years now becomes so popular to alter and rewrite and move. I suppose it's with good intentions altough I agree the new shape is a bit like an advertisement, since it displays all products rather that focusing on the free PFW. And I had plenty of footnotes, some of which have been replaced by other footnotes which I don't think are more trustworthy than my original ones. I acutually wouldn't be surprised if someone at Kerio has been tampering with the page. For example since "uncomfortable" links stating that the Kerio split from Tiny was unvoluntary have been replaced with links to some google talk page saying it was all planned. And since the date for each version is now published here - who cares about the date for each minor version change? That's my humble opinion.

Still at the same time I'm a bit tired of people accusing wiki pages of being advertisements. It's not too bad now. But it's a bit "advertisementy" isn't it? --DavidGGG 16:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind reverting it basically back to my original post.

Article is fine[edit]

If this article is so much like an advertisement, what you are proposing it is advertising?

I have been writing an article for some time privately on my blog as part of a post about software firewalls on windows, which is why I was able to source so much information so quickly. I never wrote it up on Wikipedia as I never released the article to my blog, it's still filed as incomplete. Consequently up-on recently finding the original article about Tiny/Kerio I decided to utilise my resources/information and more accurately cover the subject.

I rewrote the article and split it up appropriately due to the following:

  • a) As a guidance to the versions as "it's hard to get a grip", so I have covered almost every historic version I could find. (I'm assuming you have got to grips with it now).
  • b) There was no article on Tiny Software, Tiny Personal Firewall, CA Personal Firewall, and very little information for Sunbelt Software, Sunbelt Personal Firewall, Kerio Technologies, and Kerio Personal Firewall.
  • c) This information will appeal to Wikipedia users as there was limited information on the subject anywhere else. There are also references to where old versions can be sourced.
  • d) I decided to include all the "Versions" I could find with citation so that in the future people could add "Development" sections, which shows the change log.
  • e) Trying to cover all the different software versions under one article when they went in different directions was painful, considering an article for Sunbelt Personal Firewall and Kerio Technologies already existed as well.
  • f) Some of the information on the original was inaccurate, and required citation.
  • g) You mentioned "I'm new at this", I could tell, so I decided to give you a helping hand.

Ultimately reverting back to the original article would be stupid.

--Hm2k 17:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The new version is very much focused on products. All it does is list all versions of the products.

The main interest for most (probably all) looking up Kerio firewall on wikipedia is the free version. The original version of this page was focused on this.

It's sad that Wikipedia is governed by the rule "the most stubborn wins" and the scrutinizers' motto "I'm a stickler for details but don't care about the content". Someone at "top level" should filter out the good stuff, make sure the best parts of texts already written are kept, and control the reverting/moving/updating and bitching. And I do recommend any reader to look at the original post instead.

And how come someone is allowed to write the word "stupid" even in a talk page? --152.73.73.5 (talk) 07:41, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Find sources[edit]

You can help expand this article by finding sources:

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

--Hm2k (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

If you are going to tag something for a merge discussion, you need to actually start the discussion and state your case for it.

Kerio Technologies

It has been suggested that Kerio Control be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)
It has been suggested that Kerio Connect be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

The article Kerio Connect is not tagged for a merge discussion. Does someone still think it should be merged even with all the reviews and awards it got from magazines? I'm against that merger. The other I don't have an opinion on, since I know nothing about it. Dream Focus 16:45, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge This article would gain weight by merging the product articles into it. --Hm2k (talk) 19:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I came here looking for information about the company. The company has several products, and at least 4 active products. The article at Kerio Connect is quite comprehensive and works well as a stand alone article. I don't support merging, and would like to see this article expanded.

Oppose merge The other articles would lose clarity, focus and detail if merged into this article 59.167.243.34 (talk) 01:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. The above comment does not match the actual Wikipedia policy guidelines. Topics must be independently notable, and clearly the products are not. Any claims that are not verifiable with cited sources can be removed at any time. I would also add Kerio Operator to the list. Wikipedia policy is also to avoid being a product guide. That info gets dated quickly anyway, unless someone (often with a conflict of interest) keeps on top of it. Alternative would be to go back and start deletion debate again. W Nowicki (talk) 18:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Kerio Control[edit]

Not independently notable; the article is mostly just release notes, but what content there is belongs here per WP:PRODUCT. FalconK (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge products are completely independent and different from each other. Microsoft Word, PP, Excel, Outlook etc do also exist seperately TheKarpati (talk) 17 November 2016 (CET) —Preceding undated comment added 14:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- this product is not independently notable. Two of the sources listed are (1) Wikipedia; (2) ITCentralStation, which is not an independent source. Microsoft Word is the most popular word processing software in the world; it's odd to compare it to this product. Please see WP:EINSTEIN. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per K.e.coffman. WP:OTHERSTUFF argument doesn't have much weight. Widefox; talk 12:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Support Agree. Notability of this software alone is doubtful. Kerio Technologies is ideal target for merger. Pavlor (talk) 16:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • This one is already redirected to Kerio Technologies article. Discussion should be closed, I think. Pavlor (talk) 16:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Kerio Connect[edit]

Not independently notable, but the content belongs here per WP:PRODUCT. FalconK (talk) 13:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge products are completely independent and different from each other. Microsoft Word, PP, Excel, Outlook etc do also exist seperately TheKarpati (talk) 17 November 2016 (CET)
  • Support -- for reasons outlined in the preceding section. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This one is already redirected to Kerio Technologies article. Discussion should be closed, I think. Pavlor (talk) 16:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Samepage[edit]

Not independently notable per WP:CORP. FalconK (talk) 13:27, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge Samepage Inc is an independent subsidiary of Kerio and the product is separated from the other three products (Connect, Control, Operator). merging will be confusing TheKarpati (talk) 26 October 2016 (CET)
Huh? Samepage is listed on the Kerio article already. Anyhow, policy policy/guideline (notability etc) based arguments are stronger. Widefox; talk 15:11, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- a minor tech product. If this page is not a suitable target, then Samepage would be a candidate for deletion. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:36, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose How childish does this sound: if I cannot merge/delete this one, delete another one. TheKarpati —Preceding undated comment added 08:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
One vote per user please. P.S. -- Samepage is listed in the infobox on this page. Should it be removed from the infobox then? K.e.coffman (talk) 08:15, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

K.e.coffman You are absolutely right. Sorry for my wording. Corrected TheKarpati —Preceding undated comment added 08:21, 18 November 2016 (UTC) TheKarpati 08:26, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support after the merge we can always tag the redirect with "related" etc so I see no barrier to merging. Widefox; talk 12:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment User:TheKarpati is an WP:SPA account that claims no COI, and per guideline/policy this is noted here, details at WP:COIN. Widefox; talk 12:27, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Agree. Notability of this software alone is doubtful. Kerio Technologies is ideal target for merger. Pavlor (talk) 16:11, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support wp:corp Darkstar1st (talk) 12:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, noting that there have been significant changes since the merge was last discussed. Keiro Technologies has been taken over by another company, and Samepage seems to a distinct and extant spin-out. So, I suggest that a merge is no longer appropriate given that the software has diverged from its association with the company. Klbrain (talk) 11:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Closing merge, given the change in circumstances (and no objection over the last month). Klbrain (talk) 22:20, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Templates[edit]

We now have several templates on top of the page, maybe it is time to remove some of them.

COI - clear case, this one should stay

Advertisment - I think this was more about prior state before the last AfD. Could someone please point to phrases still written like advert (or even better remove most offending parts)?

GNG - last AfD ended with "no consensus", this one should stay

Buzzwords - any examples?

POV - latest addition. However, I thought I trimmed the article to bare-bone phrases to avoid this issue (there is no evaluation of this company or its products). Again, any examples of POV language? Pavlor (talk) 19:48, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I removed three of the tags, keeping too. I've also removed some uncited and / or promo content. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. Thanks! Pavlor (talk) 06:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fate[edit]

It says "Fate Acquired by GFI Group"

while in History it says "Kerio was bought by GFI Software.", which is correct. Kerio was never owned by GFI Group. 217.5.224.139 (talk) 12:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kerio_Technologies&oldid=1203253715"