Talk:Fravia/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Why has this page gotten so much worse?

Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

This page is just utterly terrible right now. Fravia is an inspiration for "many hackers"??? It's very clear that Fravia studied and taught reverse engineering as well as web searching, so that statement is misleading to say the least. Why are facts like his lecturing venues not covered in the paper, and why is there still confusion over his notability though it is clearly discussed on this discussion page?173.18.252.188 (talk) 13:40, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Lack of reliable sources. — Matt Crypto 11:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

It is time to search ... to learn ;-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.126.146.97 (talk) 06:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Finally at least

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I see with pleasure that someone started again to work on Fravia's page. Thank you to the new contributors. mgua (talk) 18:17, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Rest in Peace dear Fravia - Reposes en Paix. It is fine even if Fravia was an unknown(?) or secret seeker he would had be amused we search and finally found him ...by tracing you ...but now please don't throw oil by going out of the frying pan, into the fire. See WP:AGF. Peace ;-) Neuromancien (talk) 12:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Please Respect Fravia' Desire

Latest comment: 14 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

Fravia was very concerned about his privacy. He did a lot to protect it. Please remove his real name from the current version of the page. It is not nice to be irrespective with his whole life and behaviour just some days after his death.

This was the reason of the note I put on my page. (the one who was deleted by administrators) Administrators, please consider to not allow anonymous edits to your page.

a very sad Marco Guardigli mgua (talk) 01:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, naming Fravia could put living relatives of this person at risk. I don't see any need to name Fravia at all considering the fact that his identity was never made public beond that of jokes and misdirections. The record should be deleted if it compromises the privacy of a deceased person's family and thus their safty given the controversial political opinions voiced under the name Fravia.Xetxo (talk) 02:54, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Fravia was very concerned about his privacy. He did a lot to protect it. Please remove his real name from the current version of the page. -- I second this. 94.212.184.143 (talk) 09:34, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

whois lookup on fravia.com gives:

  Administrative, Technical Contact:
     Ravia, Fjalar

Evercat (talk) 10:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

You can lie to a registrar. Since there are no RS about his real name, and apparently he and his family want(ed) it to remain private, it's better remove any mention of a real name ATM. Zorbid (talk) 16:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

And beyond this, the "part" of him that is "notable" is the one you can see on the web, so there's no need to talk about real life Fravia, ... enough to talk about the Real Character of Fravia (behind it, there's the real Fravia, but his private life is his) --Ittakezou0 (talk) 19:27, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

notability

Latest comment: 14 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

I just now learnt that fravia has died, and was surprised to find that the first "hit" for the search phrase "fravia" on Google was a Wikipedia article. That being said, this just means that wikipedia has gotten a higher google ranking over the years. Fravia was always WAY up there in page rankings. Both with his main page, and with the dozens of comprehensive mirrors of his site. Even questioning the notability of this person, strikes me as an excellent example of how people trying to "clean up" wikipedia by deleting articles, can do so much harm to wikipedia - and to historical record. Fravia was MONUMENTAL to the hacker/cracker/reverser scene in the 90s and early 2000s. He was a huge influence on me, and many thousands of other hardcore computer experts, and his legacy lives on today. Learning about his death was for me somewhat comparable to hearing that Michael Jackson had died (and I was a huge MJ fan). If you don't know who fravia is, you really have no more clue about reverse engineering than the average gardener has about superstring theory, and you should stay well clear of trying to influence an article on the subject! This is also a prime example of the kind of article wikipedia needs. It is EXCELLENTLY suited for wikipedias "cooperative editing", since this is a modern, influential persona whos description can not be found in conventional records. This is also the kind of information that would risk being lost, and left dangling in the realm of folklore, myth and unknown influences, if nothing was done to establish a coherent article in a lasting encyclopedia. Without articles like this, Wikipedia is little more than an archaic clone of old encyclopedias, with little value to historians and others in the future. I would also like to say that this article would definately be limp if it tried to describe fravia by his given name as a "regular boring person", when in fact he was an influential persona through his digital identity. Similar to the common practice for composers, authors and so on, his most influential works should form a good part of a basis for the article. And that means his formal academic career is far from the most essential information, although it is interesting as a biographical background on the person that was fravia. Associates like +ORC are also worthy of more than just a line at the bottom of the article. Imagine an article about Shakespeare, written right after his death, where someone mentions his real name, formal education and not much more, only to have his article nominated for deletion shortly thereafter... This article should definately not be stripped down any further to restrict itself to "printed sources", and it should of course stay up. In conclusion: The article about fravia is a very notable, very important article. 84.215.75.138 (talk) 20:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I thought this over and the conclusion is that the site "Fravia" kept is/was definitely notable, I would even say THE site for the type of content back in the day. The site should have it's own article and if the author of the site doesn't have enough notability then he should be just a mention in the article about the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.172.94 (talk) 15:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be demand for an article about this person, and he passes a Google notability test. Also, the fact that so many people have edited the page suggests he's notable. The AfD discussion suggests that the reason people didn't like it was that it was badly written. This can be fixed. Evercat (talk) 15:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Understood that Fravia was a big name in certain online circles, but it's not at all clear at present that he meets Wikipedia:Notability (people); in particular, can we construct a biographical article from reliable sources? — Matt Crypto 16:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes , there is enough information on his web page and on other sites such as woodmann in orde to do that Stefan.petrea (talk) 03:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Moved from main...

IMPORTANT! It is not good to redirect fravia to reverse engineering. he was a master in software reversing (which is *related* to software reverse engineering), and (in the last 10 years), dedicated his efforts to internet information searching.

I was a personal friend of Mr Fravia, and knew him since 1996. definitely i disapprove the choice of redirecting this searches to reverse engineering, which was NOT his field.

Marco Guardigli Technical Director TomWare Group

(this comment was made in the article by Marco Guardigli)

Not Italian

Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

AFAIK, Fravia was not an "Italian software reverse engineer". He was Finnish and, according to his own website, his real name was Fjalar Ravia (see http://www.searchlores.org/io13.htm but forget the photo, that's Verne ;) ) -- R. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.101.81.13 (talk) 06:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

What about this? http://dave.lab6.com/acid/dump/2003/wrongfra.htm - lm, 28 July 2010, 14:21 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.98.124.98 (talk) 12:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Fjalar Ravia was an invented identity. He was actually an Italian called Francesco Vianello. 79.41.149.116 (talk) 03:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

old dispute banner from 2009

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just remove it since it very old. The old sandbox article is here if you need it. Neuromancien (talk) 13:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Fravia helped me write secure code

Coding expensive applications in the 90's, reading the fravia.org website helped me to make my applications more secure from cracking, or so I think. The site read like a how-to (or especially how-not-to) manual on secure coding techniques; in that sense, it was a developer support site. I thank the memory of Fravia for opening my understanding and imagination regarding cracking and code security. It may be helpful for the article to contain content in this regard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vlevy (talk • contribs) 31 May 2013‎

Fravia+ Is Notable? Yes

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I invite all people that were inspired by Fravia+ to continue posting to this talk page. He was highly notable in a specific underground community. I anticipate this will be born out in time as the WP notability criteria were not designed to identify Fravia+s kind of notability.

It is a real shame that this article was deleted. It's kind of funny when 10 other articles mention Fravia+ yet there is no Fravia article. Fravia+ was an inspiration for half of my IT career. He is known throughout hacking and RE community and was genuinely outside of all mainstream media. You'll find thousands of people in a very select field that know exactly who Fravia+ is and why he was important. 49.183.88.195 (talk) 02:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I restored the article and added fourteen new references. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 03:59, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fravia. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.searchlores.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fravia. 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:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.scientificblogging.com/quantum_diaries_survivor/blog/farewell_chicco
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.searchlores.org/introd.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515125503/http://searchlores.org/tadimens.htm to http://searchlores.org/tadimens.htm
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.searchlores.org/realicra/realicra.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090515125503/http://searchlores.org/tadimens.htm to http://searchlores.org/tadimens.htm
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.searchlores.org/paris/paris1.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 09:26, 7 December 2017 (UTC)