Talk:Tahoe-LAFS

It seems like Tahoe-LAFS is a synonym for the article's lemma, in this case it should be emphasized as such.

Sources added

Actually, they're more properly references, as no content is in the article as a result. However, I looked at these sources, and found the following:

• Haver, Eirik; Melvold, Eivind and Ruud, Pål (23). "Cloud Storage Vault". Institutt for telematikk. pp. 2-3, 20-21 80-80. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

They cite Tahoe as inspiration for the work (as the thesis research is based on it), devote a bit in "Related Work" and "Existing Solutions" to it, and that is all. Most of the mentions are "we did this, which is similar to Tahoe LAFS". There's maybe 2-3 pages worth of text related to Tahoe-LAFS out of 103 pages, and most of it is not explanatory of the Tahoe technology. I therefore consider that trivial.

• Arjan Peddemors, Christiaan Kuun, Rogier Spoor, Paul Dekkers and Christiaan den Besten (29). "Survey of Technologies for Wide Area Distributed Storage". p. 17. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

1/2 page of text, states that it exists and that the project chose not to use it. I question the relevance here.

• Huchton, Scott (March 2011). "Secure mobile distributed file system (MDFS)". Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School. pp. 8-9. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

One table and a brief explanation in an introductory section of an MSCS thesis. Not mentioned in the abstract of the paper.

• "Cryptographic Issues in Trustworthy Cloud Storage". Retrieved 15 December 2012. Research proposal to address shortcomings of the Tahoe-LAFS system.

No indication if it actually occurred, so I question the validity of this source as wholly speculative.

• Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Workshop on Storage Security and Survivability : October 31, 2008, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. New York, N.Y.: ACM Press. 2008. pp. 21-26. ISBN 978-1-60558-299-3.

This is behind a paywall, so the editor who added this can't have read it either. No way is this usable, especially because it's a presentation by the developer, not a third-party source.

• Lee, Changhoon. Secure and trust computing, data management and applications : STA 2011 workshops: IWCS 2011 and STAVE 2011, Loutraki, Greece, June 28 - 30, 2011. Berlin: Springer. pp. 193. ISBN 3642223648.

One page in almost 200? That's it? Also, this source is also not readable online, so it's no good as far as I'm concerned, because the person who added it could not have found this either.

• Renata Spolon Lobato; Renato Dulizio Martins (2011). "Avaliacao De Desempenho De Sistemas De Arquivos Distribuidos" (in Spanish). São José do Rio Preto. pp. 10-12. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

This is Portuguese, not Spanish, because the link is from Brazil. I can't read it, and the editor who added this can't read it either. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to consider this an appropriate source. MSJapan (talk) 01:37, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Reply from "source" adder:

• Haver, Eirik; Melvold, Eivind and Ruud, Pål (23). "Cloud Storage Vault". Institutt for telematikk. pp. 2-3, 20-21 80-80. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

Doesn't matter if they thank Tahoe as a "inspiration for the work", that is in the preface, not in the content. Amount of text is not an issue as long as it is not less than one sentence (WP:TRIVIALMENTION). This is a reliable source.

• Arjan Peddemors, Christiaan Kuun, Rogier Spoor, Paul Dekkers and Christiaan den Besten (29). "Survey of Technologies for Wide Area Distributed Storage". p. 17. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

You are complaining that the source did not want to use Tahoe because it was unsuitable for their purposes? That is the best thing you can have a secondary source say because it means they aren't being biased. "states that it exists and that the project chose not to use it." - The source confirms the first sentence is correct. Confirms cloud storage, confirms P2P, confirms that it runs on Windows, Linux, OS X. This is a reliable source.

• Huchton, Scott (March 2011). "Secure mobile distributed file system (MDFS)". Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School. pp. 8-9. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

References are supposed to confirm notability and that the information in the article is correct, it doesn't matter if the subject is mentioned in the "Not mentioned in the abstract of the paper." This is a reliable source.

• "Cryptographic Issues in Trustworthy Cloud Storage". Retrieved 15 December 2012. Research proposal to address shortcomings of the Tahoe-LAFS system.

You are correct, removed.

• Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Workshop on Storage Security and Survivability : October 31, 2008, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. New York, N.Y.: ACM Press. 2008. pp. 21-26. ISBN 978-1-60558-299-3.

Again, you are correct. Paywall wouldn't have matter though since I have access (got to love university professors; see WP:PAYWALL)

• Lee, Changhoon. Secure and trust computing, data management and applications : STA 2011 workshops: IWCS 2011 and STAVE 2011, Loutraki, Greece, June 28 - 30, 2011. Berlin: Springer. pp. 192-193. ISBN 3642223648.

Amount of text is not an issue as long as it is not less than one sentence (WP:TRIVIALMENTION). This is a reliable source. "this source is also not readable online, so it's no good as far as I'm concerned" - Have a read at Wikipedia:Offline sources. I have offline access to the book, again thank god for nerdy university professors.

• Renata Spolon Lobato; Renato Dulizio Martins (2011). "Avaliacao De Desempenho De Sistemas De Arquivos Distribuidos" (in Spanish). São José do Rio Preto. pp. 10-12. Retrieved 15 December 2012.

Thank you for the correction on it being Portuguese, not Spanish (I must have been thinking about the first Spanish source I added.) - See WP:NONENG.

• Monteiro, Julian Geraldes (16). "Modeling and Analysis of Reliable Peer-to-Peer Storage Systems" (in Spanish). de l’Université de Nice - Sophia Antipolis. pp. 17.

You didn't mention anything about this one so I will just leave it at that.

In summary, all that were not removed are reliable sources and more than just trivial mentions. I suggest you also read further into guidelines, policies and essays that deal with references/sources. -- Cheers, Riley 02:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)