Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gargoyle (router firmware)

Gargoyle (router firmware)

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

Previously deleted under name without parentheses, speedy as previously deleted declined. Has less/weaker sourcing now than when deleted before. Aaron Brenneman (talk) 05:29, 16 March 2012

Deletion log
- 08:24, 22 July 2011 Bigtimepeace (talk | contribs | block) deleted page Gargoyle Router Firmware (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gargoyle Router Firmware) (view/restore)
- 17:54, 12 July 2011 MuZemike (talk | contribs | block) restored page Gargoyle Router Firmware (73 revisions restored: Being relisted at AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2011 July 12, per rough consensus to relist at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 July 1#Gargoyle Router Firmware)
- 03:23, 1 July 2011 DMacks (talk | contribs | block) deleted page Gargoyle Router Firmware (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gargoyle Router Firmware) (view/restore)
Contents at time of deletion
- Text
  Gargoyle is an interface for small, widely available routers such as the Linksys WRT54G series and the Fonera.[1][2][3] It provides extra functionality compared with the default software including dynamic DNS, quality of service, access restrictions, bandwidth quota management and bandwidth monitoring tools. The software's developer, Eric Bishop, says its primary goal is to "provide a polished user interface for these advanced tools that is at least as easy to configure as any existing firmware".[4] Gargoyle is based on top of the most recent Kamikaze release of the OpenWrt firmware. TechSpot listed it as one of "the most popular [firmware alternative] options out there".[5]
- Refs
  - "Gargoyles to keep a watch over your PC". Cybershack. 21 Jan 2011. http://www.cybershack.com/news/gargoyles-keep-watch-over-your-pc-0. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
  - Kristian Kissling (17 Jul 2009). "Gargoyle: Web Interface for Router Configuration". Linux Magazine. http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/News/Gargoyle-Web-Interface-for-Router-Configuration. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
  - Koen Vervloesem (22 Dec 2010). "Gargoyle: completely open source and easy to use". LWN.net. http://lwn.net/Articles/420657/. Retrieved June 16, 2011.
  - Eric Bishop. "Gargoyle FAQ". gargoyle-router.com. http://www.gargoyle-router.com/wiki/doku.php?id=faq#so_what_is_this_gargoyle_project_all_about. Retrieved 21 June 2011.
  - Jose Vilches (29 June 2011). "Custom Firmware Alternatives For Your Wireless Router - TechSpot Guides". TechSpot. http://www.techspot.com/guides/416-wireless-router-custom-firmware-alternative/. Retrieved 13 July 2011.
Content when speedy (as previously deleted) declined
- Text
  Gargoyle is a free OpenWrt-based Linux distribution for a range of Broadcom and Atheros chipset based wireless routers, mainly the older-model Linksys WRT54G (including the WRT54GL and WRT54GS), Asus Routers and Netgear WNR3500L. Among notable features is the ability to limit and monitor bandwidth and set bandwidth caps per specific IP address.[2][3][4]
- Refs
  - a b http://www.gargoyle-router.com/wiki/doku.php?id=supported_routers_-_tested_routers
  - "EduBoris: Gargoyle router for bandwidth limiting / cap linksys wrt54g". EduBoris. August 9, 2009 (Updated Sep. 1 2010). http://eduboris.blogspot.com/2009/08/gargoyle-router-for-bandwidth-limiting.html. Retrieved 3 November 2011.
  - Lim, Ian (August 11, 2011). "Gargoyle Router – A Not So Ugly Solution to Bandwidth Monitoring and Quotas – Mini Review". The Gadgeteer. http://the-gadgeteer.com/2011/08/11/gargoyle-router-a-not-so-ugly-solution-to-bandwidth-monitoring-and-quotas-mini-review/. Retrieved 3 November 2011.
  - Vervloesem, Koen (December 22, 2010). "Gargoyle: completely open source and easy to use". LWN.net. Eklektix, Inc. http://lwn.net/Articles/420657/. Retrieved 5 November 2011.

Delete- certainly falls under the spirit, if not the exact letter, of G4. I don't see any good reason for this to have been restored, and the nominator is right about the sourcing. Reyk _YO! 10:19, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as per the consensus of the most recent AFD in November 2011 which closed as Keep, this article now establishes notability by referencing a second detailed review in a reliable source (The Gadgeteer) along with a review in LWN. I am surprised to see the nominator implying that the sources in the June 2011 version were stronger, as when he was arguing for deletion of the previous version he described all but the LWN source as "I do not believe that this qualifies as a reliable source. There does not appear to be indepent editorial oversight. (That's another way of saying "it's just press release churn.)". Dcxf (talk) 11:07, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Was that linked from the article talk page? (He says, without going to look.) Sorry if I missed it. I've added the box at the top, thanks for pointing it out. I don't understand the rest of what you said, I do apologise. Are you implying that LWN is non-standard coverage from a reliable source? - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 14:59, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not sure what you mean by "non-standard", but the LWN article is significant coverage from a reliable source, as is the Gadgeteer article. The other previously-cited reason for deletion, that the article was originated by the software's designer, is also no longer applicable. Dcxf (talk) 09:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - revised opinion, see comments below. --Salimfadhley (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Based upon what criteria are you deciding that it is notable? Where are the reliable sources that support your statement? - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 03:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually you are right. I've revised my opinion. I was allowing my perception of this project to cloud my judgement. It really does not seem to have any mentions in any reliable source. That's a shame because it really does seem like an interesting project. --Salimfadhley (talk) 12:52, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep: the Linux Magazine and LWN.net are reliable sources with the sufficient depth of coverage. Not sure about Cybershark. G4 doesn't apply as the text is substantially different and most recent discussion was closed with keep result. Thus we have article meeting WP:NSOFT (and WP:GNG for bureaucrats) and no reasonable deletion rationale. P.S.: it would make sense to restore the version deleted via previous AfD in place of the current article. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]