Talk:XigmaNAS

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 February 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to FreeNAS.

This article was nominated for deletion on May 1 2012. The result of the discussion was delete.

NAS4Free[edit]

I think due to the nature of Wikipedia we should let such articles to start, then improve and get growth gradually. I'm an IT security expert and believe that FOSS NAS solutions are important issue today. While I was searching for appropriate software solutions for NAS, I encountered "NAS4Free".

After some studying, I convinced that it worth to start an article about NAS4Free in the Wikipedia. Isn't it irony that here in Wikipedia we have a complete article about FreeNAS that is old name of this project (and now a trademark of a company), but no tiny article about the major project (now named NAS4Free)?!

I'm not a NAS4Free project member or fan, so the article that I create isn't an advertisement at all! Therefor please give a helping hand to improve such articles instead of killing them as a deficient infant!!

Mjdtjm (talk) 04:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another article about this subject was deleted less than a year ago due to lacking reliable, third-party sources establishing its notability. If those cannot be provided, then it is likely to be deleted again. So far as I can tell there has been no comment about this article being an advertisement. In any case, that is not my immediate concern.

My current concern is regarding copyright and our non-free content guideline: There is no reason that we should need to quote the project's webpage at all, let alone that much of it, in order to write an encyclopedia article about it. If the text really is available under a free license, then please point out where it explicitly states that, and the text can probably be restored with proper attribution. In the meantime, five sentences is not "brief" and it is not being used to "illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea", which are the requirements which should be satisfied in order to use non-free quotes per WP:NFC#Text. VernoWhitney (talk) 06:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

VernoWhitney, If your concern is copyright, so look at this from the project website:

The NAS4Free code and documentation are released under the Simplified BSD license.[1]

Mjdtjm (talk) 12:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If NAS4Free is to be considered for deletion, then FreeNAS should be too, because NAS4Free IS the original, noteworthy project, continued. FreeNAS8 is a completely new creature that through legal mechanisms has hijacked the credibility of the original project (which still continues with the name change). FreeNAS8 isn't anything special. It is a typical corporate hijacking of something useful to then monetize it (by exploiting it to sell hardware). Killermist (talk) 18:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NAS4Free is not the original project. The original author left and others picked the code base up. That's the definition of a fork. Primary sources, such as NAS4Free in this case, are not considered reliable on Wikipedia. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 11:49, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on NAS4Free. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:34, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]