Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Norton 360/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 14:25, 2 June 2009.

Norton 360

 * Nominator(s): Tyw7 ‍ ‍‍ (Talk  ●  Contributions) Leading Innovations >>>  11:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it now meets the criteria. It is a software by one of the largest security software company Symantec. This product is widely used by many people worldwide. Tyw7 ‍ ‍‍ (Talk  ●  Contributions) Leading Innovations >>>  11:28, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose,
 * 1) missing publish dates some sources do not have publish dates, however are reliable
 * 2) incomplete titles for references did not find any problems
 * 3) missing author names no author mentioned sometimes
 * 4) ref 15/16 are duplicates done
 * 5) screenshot is of trial version true
 * 6) where's the reception/reviews/criticism section? incorporated in article; still need to expand
 * 7) version/date releases with source? Is that information likely to be contested?
 * 8) if it contains a number of security features, why is it classified as an Antivirus in the infobox? done
 * 9) browser dab link ?
 * 10) http://www. can be removed from address in infobox. done
 * 11) If it is so widely used then why isn't there more coverage information available?--Otterathome (talk) 21:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now - it's good but i really need properly formatted references and maybe a release and reception. I.e. what did reviewers think were its best features, how many units were sold etc. --Thanks, Hadseys 01:30, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Working on the reception section and researching market share


 * Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. You really should put the authors of the references first and not italicise them, though. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Done


 * Suggest withdrawal there is clearly much work and development needed here, it fails criteria 3 of WP:GACR, see the associated article Norton Internet Security to get an idea of the length and layout of how the article should be. A simple news search shows many sources which can be used in the article.--Otterathome (talk) 14:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The suggestions are great

Replies from User:TechOutsider

I did not reach a consensus with User:Tyw7 before nominating this article for FAC; we never even discussed it at all. However, now that the article has been nominated, the pointers given are very useful. Thank you.


 * Some of the articles used do not have publish dates.


 * Comments – Change Version History section header to Version history, because "history" isn't a proper noun. Also, reference 25 has a linked date, which has been discouraged in the Manual of Style for some time. References shouldn't be in all capital letters, either. If this does end up not passing, I suggest another peer review.  Giants2008  ( 17-14 ) 00:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I just wish Tyw7 gave me some time to consider and improve the article beforehand. I don't really have the patience to sit down and do all this in one day, however it has to be done in a timely manner. Too bad Tyw7 is taking a wikibreak ... TechOutsider (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.