 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Although I was not the person who removed the proposal for deletion, I will attempt to explain here why I believe it is notable.
1. The author is a well-known and respected Linux kernel developer.
2. The project is open source.
3. The proposed filesystem features rival those of ZFS and aims to establish Tux3 as a contender as a modern FS.
4. The project has received coverage from reputable sources such as LKML, Kernel Trap, etc.
If anyone believes I'm overlooking something or has a differing opinion on the matter, please let me know.
Note: For another FS with a situation similar to this one, see HAMMER
SHostetler (talk) 07:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- Only point 1 and 4 do matter, with regard to Wikipedia notability, verifiability and neutrality (ie. no special privileges for content regarding open source, and the qualities (or lack of) of a product do not qualify it to have an article) guidelines. But I agree: Tux3 had a large press coverage, hence qualify for a Wikipedia article. Benjamin Pineau (talk) 09:29, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the cleanup-jargon. This article is about a particular filesystem and the implementation decisions its author has made. The argon words here are fundamental concepts and explained in their own articles. It is not appropriate to repeat the explanations here. Paul Foxworthy (talk) 22:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Drama
editWhy does this article seem to be overflowing with drama? the bit im referring to is "At 17:59 Japan Standard Time, 17 February 2009, Linux booted from a Tux3 root filesystem for the first time in recorded history". Im sure the developers were happy that they made something that worked but its a filesystem, its nothing special. --84.66.39.3 (talk) 17:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)