Talk:Fedora Linux/Archive 2012

Latest Version Layout

I have been working on a Linux Users Group resource page and need some conformity of all the Wiki Linux versions and distributions. Debian has an excellent template and I have made an RSS reader to pluck version data from the wiki page. Would be nice if I could get all of them to follow this method and my page could keep up to date with all the latest versions. RSS source path http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Debian&feed=rss&action=history RSS Template. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Latest_stable_software_release/Debian&action=edit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icarusfactor (talk • contribs) 02:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

All of them? Try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing — CpiralCpiral 09:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Listing of derivatives

I deleted some derivatives but Esoxid disagree. I still claim they should be deleted however as they're not notable enough to be included. Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ubuntu-based_distributions and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ubuntu-based_distributions There not all distributions are included as 1) They would be too many 2) They're not all notable. I'm going to go ahead and delete this. We can keep a discussion here if we want to keep them. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fedora_%28operating_system%29&diff=509894179&oldid=509480260 81.233.34.70 (talk) 07:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm gonna have to agree with the IP; external links don't belong in the article, and they wouldn't belong in the external links section either as they would all fail WP:ELNO. At the very least they would have to have some kind of third-party independent source in order to warrant inclusion. - SudoGhost 07:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Rule #14, that Wikipedia should not link to manufacturers, suppliers or customers? RIP. Which one then? — CpiralCpiral 08:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

WP:ELNO #13; these sites are not about Fedora (operating system), they are marginally related, and don't belong in this article. Since you brought up WP:NORULES, there is also the WP:COMMONSENSE that an article isn't a link farm for any marginally related subject regardless of notability. WP:IAR doesn't mean "ignore something if you disagree with it". - SudoGhost 09:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

After reading the discussion, I see your points. My original desire to include the derivatives was based on Rule #1, since I thought they were unique resources to anyone interested in Fedora. If they violate others, then they should no stay. Esoxid^t•contribs 15:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Unless they have their own article, an encyclopedia must list notable distros somewhere.

Yes but they must turn the List_of_linux_distributions#References section into link farms to cite notability. — CpiralCpiral 23:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia could retain the information for sociocultural value, say in a subsection by the title Anthropologically notable distributions and include the Brazil, Russia, Venezuala, and Persian ones. As for our own American cultural value, since a RedHat employee has engineered the kind of distribution that is not politically crippled (audio and video), that is good information for our computer culture now, information they clamor contentiously for, and would happily squint for, something a encyclopedia should know now and for posterity, that is significant and notable now and maybe for a good long time to come. Besides the article is way spacious. — CpiralCpiral 08:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Sociocultural value would be determined by third-party reliable sources, not by the distro itself.. - SudoGhost 09:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Unless they have their own article, an encyclopedia must list notable distros somewhere. As a special case perhaps, keeping the EL in the article, it does make us look like a "raw data" kind of place. This is not wanted, but the real "third party" is an anthropologist who may partially decide a case to study by perusing WP's raw data. If it turns out to be an ethnography, everybody wins, and the data we presented ipso facto becomes notable. — CpiralCpiral 23:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Notable plus plus interesting distributions

The section Distributions was copy edited while I re-added Omega and PLS Linux from previous discussion #Listing of derivatives.

• fix formatting on the dashes that go after the links and before the description. the   will never be needed if it so close to the bullet that it never gets to the other edge of the page.
• move the 'distro watch' and 'Fedora wiki' sources (in small print) underneath the distribution bullet so I could put a See also link to List_of_linux_distributions#Fedora-based
• Change 'Active' to 'Notable list of Fedora distributions'.

The list should be not only notable, as are the items at the above mentioned List_of_linux_distributions#Fedora-based, but also more interesting than them.

In order to keep the size of the list down, per previous discussion mentioned above, please discuss un-interesting list items for removal.

• • Berry Linux – a medium-sized Fedora based distribution that provides support for Japanese and English.
  • BLAG Linux and GNU – a stripped down 1-CD Fedora with Debian's APT system.
  • Fuduntu – Optimized for netbooks, development headed by Jupiter creator Fewt.
  • Hanthana Linux – from Sri Lanka
  • Linpus – made by Taiwanese company Linpus Technologies for the Asian market.
  • MythDora – based around MythTV's media center capabilities.
  • Ojuba Linux – an Arabic Linux distribution.
  • Red Hat Enterprise Linux – enterprise Linux offering from Red Hat, which branches from the current Fedora baseline.
  • Omega Linux – remix with full multimedia support
  • Russian Fedora Remix – version of Fedora, adapted for Russia. Contains proprietary drivers and software.
  • PLS Linux – high client-server-performance version issued by the Government of Venezuela.
  • Xange – (formerly Simplis and Vixta) is an easy-to-use, Fedora-based desktop Linux distribution featuring the KDE desktop.
  • Moblin – a distribution mainly for MIDs, netbooks and embedded devices

— CpiralCpiral 23:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fedora (operating system)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jamesx12345 (talk · contribs) 22:23, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll review this in the next week or so. James^x12345 22:23, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

First up, this article is really short. It is around a sixth of the size of the Debian and Ubuntu articles, which suggests that there is a lot of detail not present here. There is no section on hardware requirements or the development process, and details about kernels and packages are left out. The GAC don't require it to be too long, but without significantly more detail I wouldn't pass it. Sorry. James^x12345 22:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Since there was no response, I'm failing it this time, but if another GAN is opened I will happily review it. James^x12345 16:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)