Talk:Netgear SC101

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 September 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Tone edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Someone flagged this article with WP:TONE pointing to discussion in the talk page, which didn't exist. Unfortunately, the tone of the article is appropriate and the information is accurate so I would leave it alone. Altaphon (talk) 20:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

The tone is bad. It's a SAN, not a NAS. A lot of the article seems to be complaining about that fact, and seems to be written by someone who doesn't understand storage well. Of course, if you have a SAN with an NTFS volume, your Linux box will have trouble reading it!!! Of course, if you want your host to access a SAN, you need the right drivers on it. It's not a NAS. Stop expecting it to be one and you'll be fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.219.25.193 (talk) 19:01, 24 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, still needs work. This is not a place to air complaints, but describe in a neutral tone. One idea might be to merge in the Nasan and Z-SAN articles, since those do not seem to be independently notable? W Nowicki (talk) 19:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

External links modified (February 2018) edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Netgear SC101. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:27, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic