Talk:Online Armor Personal Firewall

Candidate for Speedy Deletion
I feel that this is a notable software for the simple fact that it has received a perfect score on a respected independent test, produced by a independent testing company, surpassing all commercial firewalls in reliability and security. Also I think the speedy deletion template is a wrong template, since this article concerns software, not a real person, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content. --Petrim (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I suppose that software is not web content, but arguably free ware is, and that is why I put the tag there. But I'll take the tag off and let you work on establishing some more sources and notability. Beach drifter (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I'll try my best, but there isn't that many well known and independent companies performing firewall tests. But so far I've found out by googling and briefly browsing internet security forums that even though it's a marginal firewall as of yet, there is still quite a lot of users that are happy with it. Anyhow, I'll get on improving the article now.--Petrim (talk) 21:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I've done some revising, added some more sources and references, but I'd like to hear what more should be done for this article and of course how, since I'm not a very adept editor in Wikipedia. Help expanding and improving this article would be appreciated. --Petrim (talk) 22:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the article looks much better and the citing is good. I still think it's a ways from meeting inclusion guidelines because of a lack of notability. Given the subject matter maybe it's notable enough, I don't know. Good luck. Beach drifter (talk) 01:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * For a screenshot of Online Armor Personal Firewall, the image screenshot fair use rationale should contain the license: Non-free software screenshot -  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 05:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Screenshot
Can anyone add an image of Online Armor? I don't know which license I should use. I managed to put the right license on the italian wikipedia, but english wikipedia is different.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leolas92 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

About the Matousec references
Do notice that the ol' Firewall Security Challenge has been renamed to "Proactive Security Challenge", and on this test, Online Armor has 99%. Only Comodo has perfect score. Can anyone correct this? You can see the results at Matousec's website. Centralkong (talk) 00:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)