Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/NAS4Free

NAS4Free is the proper continuation of the FreeNAS project (FreeNAS name was purchased and the project started from scratch as of FreeNAS 8.0, NAS4Free continued development of the original codebase under the name NAS4Free). See |NAS4Free Project History

Notoriety for FreeNAS prior to Dec 2009 arguably belongs to the NAS4Free project, as iXsystems, Inc completely re-wrote the code. From a software developers perspective FreeNAS 8.0+ is a new project inspired by FreeNAS 7 and NAS4Free is a continuation of the original FreeNAS project under a different name. (Quite literally, FreeNAS 8.x is a different project than FreeNAS 7. On the other hand, NAS4Free 9.1 is FreeNAS 7 updated to use FreeBSD 9.1 as a base system; FreeNAS 7.x plugins still work on NAS4Free 9.1)

Since the FreeNAS page links to the NAS4Free page as a reference, I would expect people will continue to try and re-create this page. Would it be better to redirect NAS4Free to the FreeNAS page and make a section of the FreeNAS page dedicated to NAS4Free? Or must Slashdot users mention NAS4Free before wikipedia users are allowed to write about it?

Seriously... the 7 citations on the FreeNAS page are:
 * 1) Deadlink -- FreeNAS on the VMWare Application Marketplace
 * 2) Slashdot posting of the FreeNAS blog -- "FreeNAS Switching From FreeBSD To Debian Linux". Slashdot.com. Retrieved 2009-12-07.
 * 3) FreeNAS blog -- "FreeNAS ready for the next step!". FreeNAS Blog. Retrieved 2009-12-10.
 * 4) FreeNAS blog -- "Rumours of FreeNAS Death Greatly Exaggerated". FreeNAS blog. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
 * 5) Same deadlink as #1 -- "FreeNAS is a Network-Attached Storage (NAS) server". VMware, Inc.. Retrieved 2008-02-28.
 * 6) Site that hosts both NAS4Free and FreeNAS -- "Project of the Month January 2007". SourceForge, Inc.. Retrieved 2008-02-28.
 * 7) A tech news site -- "Best of open source in storage - 2007". InfoWorld. Retrieved 2008-02-28.

Only #7 and #6 arguably establish notoriaty outside of the project itself. #2, #3, and #4 are all directly spawned to the project itself. #1 and #5 are the same citation and are both dead links. What's required to establish NAS4Free's notoriety? Mentions from external sources? 1000s of weekly downloads on SourceForge? reviews by hardware resellers and tech journals? Ciol.com isn't as notable as InfoWorld and SourceForge hasn't named NAS4Free a project of the month, but NAS4Free does have 30% of the weekly downloads that FreeNAS does, making it as popular a download as [aMSN], [Frets_on_Fire], and [FreeCAD].

So rather than creating an article just to have it deleted, I thought I might ask for guidance first. 70.97.12.233 (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * In order to establish notability, there needs to be significant coverage of the subject in at least two reliable sources independent of the subject. Which two of the above do you believe meet this criterion? -—Kvng 23:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)