| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the ShieldsUP article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notability question edit
The notability of this page has been questioned, but I have removed the tag because:
- There are at least 5 reliable, credible, relevant third-party references (lifehacker, routersecurity.org, howtogeek, computerworld and makeuseof).
- I think those together paint a picture of its general use, usefulness and notability in the industry.
- I would note that it doesn't have a high profile outside of the network testing community, but then I wouldn't expect it to.
peterl (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
- While I find it a useful and commendable site, I still have some doubts about its notability, through while borderline, I'd lean towards saying it is notable. Wish the coverage was discuss its significance, and not just be a "how to use", however. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:59, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- Point taken. One factor is that the intended audience are more interested in what it does, rather than its significance. In my view phrases noted like "an oldie but goodie" (routersecurity) and "Everyone should run this test." (computerworld) make it notable. I've found a few other notations that I'll add too. peterl (talk) 21:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)