851:
360:
relationship with
Terrasoft Solutions release of Black Lab Linux." So, it still sounds to me as if your Black Lab Linux has nothing to do with the topic of the original article, other than happening to share the same distribution name. I could be wrong. If so, please explain it to me, as I've already suggested. Until you do, this is content dispute, not a question of a conflict of interest edit. I appreciate that you are following Knowledge's procedures by changing your original commercial username to a personal one, and by asking for a conflict of interst edit (and I don't object to the edit on COI grounds).
1171:
until (and if) it becomes notable enough for its own article, I'm not going to argue. As for the issue of similar articles existign while yours was turned down... once again, your article was turned down because the admin thought it duplicated an existing article, not because it failed on notability grounds (although notability may have been raised as a concern later). Even if it had been turned down on notability grounds, the existence of other articles with the same issues is not an acceptable argument for the inclusion of another defficient article. read
162:
366:
old article's new title). Perhaps the original article could even be deleted. If your new article is not accepted I don't see a problem clarifying the original article to distinguish between the article topic and your Black Lab Linux, but not with the amount of detail you are trying to have added about your distribution. If the article isn't about your distribution, there's no need to specify the four distinct variants of your distribution, for example.
22:
1190:
try to do this, we get blocked. We need this article either updated or removed. If you guys want promotional sources, hey we have the media center hardware link, we have the
Windows XP upgrade link. We are working very hard to get this updated and when Layla got the article deleted I e-mailed the editor that removed it, he said it was because of duplicate title, not because she copied and pasted the article
350:"Just because your company has now made a distribution with the same name is no reason to shoehorn your information into the original article. Create a new article if the new distrubution is notable, and create a disambiguation page if necessary." I then suggested that you take it up on the talk page if you disagreed, but you did not. I see that you did ask a question on the second user's talk page
865:
84:
74:
53:
721:
to the orignal name, then the article needs to be completely rewritten to show the history of the named distributions. You cna't have it both ways. If thats the way it goes then the old release becomes just an item in the history section of the rewritten article. I'm fine with that, particularly because the old release does not seem particularly notable anyways.
736:
revision seems to emphasize above is that their recent release is an independent re-write of the original product. As such, the proposal above is confusing and should be re-worded to clarify that the company has a relationship with both products, but both products have no relation to each other except in name. ~
1105:
I agree. I suspect that the original article only survived so long in its current state because it was dormant (and no-one noticed it). I'm not familiar with articles on software distributions or operating systems, but the proposed article seems to me to be lacking notability. Does the mere existence
1131:
get blasted for it. I just think its crazy. Anyhow, if you guys want to list us under Linux distributions, thats fine with me, just transfer the proposed article to that and remove this original article and then when/if we get notable or notorious enough, we will then propose a standalone article.
777:
Ok then, what we will do is go ahead and rewrite the article with the new information and we will propose it here. What happened when we had acquired Black Lab Linux was that
Terrasoft had already sold its main product, Yellowdog Linux and Yellowdog HPC to Fixstars, we acquired the rest of it. It
416:
and likely merged back into this article. The history of ownership should be an integral part of this article, should it not? I suggest a modification of the article that retains a description of the original product with a mention that ownership has been transferred. I fail to see how doing so will
365:
I still think that the best solution is a separate article for you distribution with a disambiguation. If the other Black Lab Linux is no longer active/supported I would support renaming the old distribution's article and giving your distribution the Black Lab Linux article title (with a link to the
359:
Why don't I think this material belongs? The first editor said "My company last year acquired the rights to the name Black Lab Linux which was used back in 1999 for a PowerPC based Linux distro." The desired changes to the article include "Black Lab Linux in its current incarnation does not have any
336:
I undid the edits, as can easily be seen from the edit history. I don't know who Axl
Matulic is or why you would think he would be able to make such a decision without discussing the issue with the editor who raised the issue. You didn't raise the issue on the talk page as I suggested, or on my talk
1250:
Then what do I need to do to get my updates put in there? This is the question that I have been asking for the last week. You guys say we arent notable enough well then tell me what I need to be notable enough because as I told Axl, Im trying to work with you guys here. Fixstars doesnt want any
1227:
wrt "We need this article either updated or removed." As the article stands it probably won't survive. It was already redirected once. I restored it solely because we're trying to help save the article with your updates. If the article disappears there is no guarantee your material will be anywhere
1189:
Thats not what I said at all, Im saying to move ours to Linux distributions and to remove this article. The problem we are having understanding is that we are using sources that OTHER distributions use on
Knowledge, and, looking at the Mint article they use a lot of promotional links. Yet when we
1170:
We're trying to work with you to help you incorporate your material into the existing article within
Knowledge's various requirements and guidelines. I think that we had something that would (or at least might) have worked, but if you prefer to have no mention of your current Black Hat distribution
720:
I think this is the addition, and that's part of the problem. By leaving the rest of the article as is, and then adding a section emphasizing that there is no connection between the new release and the original release it sounds like this does not belong in the same article. If they have the rights
307:
Black Lab Linux is now owned, distributed and developed by PC/OpenSystems LLC. Being as though we are now the copyright owners of Black Lab Linux we would like for ldavidson121975 edit to be reverted back and that be used. We contacted Mr. Axl
Matulic today regarding this and he said that whoever
1130:
What I personally have a problem comprehending is this, why is it that there are Linux distributions on
Knowledge, that have less sources then we do, who use the same exact sources, the LWN listing, Distrowatch listing or Linux.com listing and they are fine. When we try to get a Knowledge page we
735:
As I understand it, PC/OpenSystems LLC purchased not only the name, but all of the intellectual property. The revision above does not state that PC/OpenSystems LLC has no connection whatsoever to the original Black Labs Linux. It's impossible to have no connection because they own it now. What the
583:
In 2013, PC/OpenSystems LLC released a distribution named Black Lab Linux after a dispute with the USPTO Black Lab Linux in its current incarnation does not have any relationship with
Terrasoft Solutions release of Black Lab Linux. PC/OpenSystems LLC's release of Black Lab Linux is based on
835:
Formerly known as OS/4, Roberto J. Dohnert and the Black Lab Linux team decided to change the name to Black Lab Linux after the USPTO denied his trademark application for OS/4. PC/OpenSystems LLC had acquired the rights to the Black Lab Linux name after
Fixstars acquired Terrasoft Solutions and
493:
The new article was refused because of an article with a like name. This one. Several editors have said to update this article and not start a new one. So my question is this and I will let Roberto know. What information is needed to get this article edited and updated to include the current
509:
There is no problem with articles having similar names. The reason given was "recently created article that duplicates an existing topic, Black Lab Linux)" not because it had a similar name. I can't tell why this reason was used without seeing the now deleted article, but if you just copied the
1033:
mentioned that you obtained the name and the property rights to the original Black Lab Linux, even if yours now has a completley different code base. Otherwise we have an article which used to be about the Terra Soft Solutions version but suddenly makes no mention of it at all. If there's some
831:
for x86 and x86_64 hardware. It was first released in November 2013 by PC/OpenSystems LLC. Black Lab Linux is based on Ubuntu Linux tailored both for general desktop use and for the more technical user and it is also commercially made available by PC/OpenSystems LLC for business desktops,
230:
This page hasn't been notable in its more-than-six years! Due to the nature of the subject matter, it has apparently no hope of becoming so, and it needs to be folded into a real article. I just majorly cleaned up this perma-stub, for the day when someone does that. Thanks! —
346:"The problem is that you are trying to rewrite the article to cover a different subject. Black Lab Linux is about the specific 1999 distribution, not any other distribution that happens to have the same name." After a username change the edit was reinserted and I replied
393:
I made no decision, I simply expressed my opinion that you were mistaken. The thrust of my advice was to engage you on the talk page to come to an agreement, and I am gratified to see that is happening, but did not expect to see my name bandied about as an authoritative
1028:
A few minor tweaks that can be done after the article is moved, such as removing external links that are already used as refs. A larger concern is that there is no mention of the earlier Black Lab Linux. There should be some mention of the original, particularly since
1219:
a promotional name (a clear violation of the username policy), not for inserting promotional links in an article. The IP associated with that block was briefly blocked but has been unblocked. I'm not aware that any user was blocked for inserting promotional links in
1085:(already used as citation #3 above), I'm finding it difficult to find independent reliable sources giving significant coverage of this product in either of its incarnations. If notability cannot be established, then maybe it's best to merge this article into
1228:
in Knowledge. It will have to be notable enough to warrant inclusion somewhere else on its own merits, just as it does for inclusion in the existing article. The article isn't there to promote the original distribution, or your distribution. Saying that you
510:
original article over with your additions rather than creating an article about your release it would explain it. If that's wasn't the problem I suggest you contact the users who reviewed and deleted the proposed new article. It may have been a mistake.
470:
See below. If it can be stated that the rights to the Black Lab Linux name have been aquired by the new company then a rewrite about the new distribution with a bit of history shoud work. Sorry if I misunderstood the name ownership issue.
545:
23:33, March 18, 2014 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Knowledge talk:Articles for creation/Black Lab Linux (PC/OpenSystems LLC) (A10: Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic, Black Lab Linux)
540:
I don't know why they would have deleted the article on that basis if the original material was gone, but the reason given in the deletion notice was as I quoted, not because the article existed. Here it is in
1155:
As for improving this article, its kind of impossible to do. Yellowdog Linux was the most notable distribution that lived, Black Lab Linux under Terrasoft Solutions really didnt make it to mainstream.
354:
about how to link your new article to the original. Sorry I missed it, but it was 25 days after I left my message and I don't monitor other people's talk pages for replies to my posts for that long.
1208:. The argument that other article exist with those sources does not help your article. It only shows that the other articles may not be notable either. Your article has to stand on its own merits.
412:
It seems inappropriate to fork off another article about essentially the same subject, since the product, intellectual property, etc. has now changed ownership. That would be an unnecessary
454:
If you have a conflict of interest, it is best that you don't make the change yourself, but wait until others agree. The change will either be made for you, or you will be asked to do it. ~
1034:
connection between the two different Black Lab Linux versions then one article makes sense. If not then I'm back to my original objection, and my original suggestionof seperat articles.
832:
education facilities as well as high-performance, parallel computing. It is one of the few Linux distributions that uses the XFCE desktop as its primary desktop environment.
403:
Involving myself in discussion here puts me in a difficult position because OTRS typically does not resolve content disputes. Nevertheless, now that I've been pulled in....
451:
Depends what the change is. If it's what you propose below, as an addition rather than a replacement, I don't see any problem with it, but I would like Meters to weigh in.
839:
Black Lab Linux as of this writing is at release 4.2 with release 5.0 coming May 5, 2014. PC/OpenSystems LLC also provides pre-installed hardware with Black Lab Linux.
1282:
1252:
1212:
1191:
1157:
1132:
994:
779:
690:
526:
495:
437:
316:
186:
941:
525:
Nope it was a brand new article with none of the original material from this article and the reason given BY the editor was because this article existed.
1082:
987:
952:
622:
1309:
1199:
140:
1339:
1165:
1140:
1100:
787:
715:
465:
1017:
494:
incarnation of Black Lab Linux. Terrasoft Solutions does not exist anymore so the PowerPC release is no longer developed or distributed.
1260:
1245:
1184:
1066:
559:
519:
1290:
1071:
This isn't a stand-alone article about an organization, it's about a product that has some convoluted organizational relationships.
241:
1115:
747:
730:
480:
428:
1329:
130:
324:
196:
1043:
698:
351:
347:
343:
1334:
1276:
942:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Black-Lab-Media-System-Set-top-Box-Announced-Runs-New-Linux-Optimized-Distro-430910.shtml
1324:
254:
445:
1023:
534:
503:
1002:
752:
Agreed. Can the other editors provide sources to show that? I'm not likely going to be able to find them on my own.
288:
106:
1251:
more association. I mean I cant do anything different then every other Linux distribution on Knowledge has done.
1233:
180:
953:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Patent-Trolls-Kill-OS-4-OpenLinux-the-Black-Lab-Linux-Distro-Is-Born-402468.shtml
623:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Patent-Trolls-Kill-OS-4-OpenLinux-the-Black-Lab-Linux-Distro-Is-Born-402468.shtml
172:
262:
375:
1205:
1172:
277:
273:
33:
813:
This is a rewrite of the article that we would like to see published. A REPLACEMENT, not an addition to.
878:
224:
97:
58:
579:
These are the changes I propose to make and would like to know if this will be allowed to take effect.
235:
1301:
1286:
1256:
1195:
1161:
1136:
1058:
998:
783:
694:
530:
499:
441:
320:
190:
1078:
may be an appropriate course of action, although I'd prefer to see if this article can be improved.
565:
105:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
176:
212:
As is, the page is not notable. It may be notable if someone could provide the story about how
977:
919:
683:
633:
258:
21:
1008:
Submitting replacement articles defeats the purpose of the conflict of interest guideline. --
807:
573:
436:
so if I make this change, will it be allowed to take affect rather than being reverted back?
301:
285:
268:
39:
1095:
856:
742:
710:
460:
423:
312:
293:
250:
217:
8:
1281:
I went ahead and added some lines to the article for submission, as well as more sources
1086:
488:
884:
828:
238:
1074:
This article has been standing alone for about 7 years. Proposing it for deletion at
1013:
1241:
1180:
1111:
1039:
757:
726:
555:
515:
476:
371:
281:
213:
799:
1221:
207:
972:
413:
220:
evolved out of Black Lab Linux, especially if there was controversy involved,
1318:
1090:
1075:
1030:
821:
737:
705:
455:
418:
232:
171:
to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
1297:
1054:
1050:
1009:
870:
221:
89:
1237:
1176:
1107:
1035:
825:
753:
722:
551:
511:
472:
367:
908:
678:
644:
384:
Er... I am the "Axl Matulic" he has been communicating with, on OTRS.
664:
982:
668:
967:
930:
673:
600:
897:
611:
247:
Not notable. This distro doesn't even appear in Distrowatch.
169:
contributor has declared a personal or professional connection
659:
102:
920:
http://www.linux.com/directory/Distributions/black-lab-linux
634:
http://www.linux.com/directory/Distributions/black-lab-linux
417:
reduce the quality of the article rather than improve it. ~
842:
864:
704:
Is this being proposed as an addition or a replacement? ~
83:
1055:
the minimum standards for having a stand alone article.
337:
page, and neither did whichever editor Axl Matulic is.
73:
52:
846:
101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
79:
1232:the article to be updated or removed has a hint of
280:, and removes the stub tag. It should be reverted.
1298:actual third party coverage from reliable sources
1316:
1211:You keep misunderstanding or misstating things.
333:Please sign your talk page edits with 4 tildes.
308:told me to start a new article was mistaken.
1049:additional concerns are that there are no
342:As I said on the first editor's talk page
19:
1300:, I will be nominating for deletion. --
1317:
1051:reliably published third party sources
550:As I said, take it up with the admin.
199:) This user has declared a connection.
909:http://lwn.net/Distributions/#nontech
645:http://lwn.net/Distributions/#nontech
1340:Articles with connected contributors
156:
95:This article is within the scope of
15:
38:It is of interest to the following
13:
14:
1351:
1053:that show the organization meets
988:Patent Trolls kill OS/4 OpenLinux
863:
849:
160:
82:
72:
51:
20:
1234:Knowledge:Ownership of articles
946:
935:
135:This article has been rated as
1081:On the other hand, other than
1018:00:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
924:
913:
902:
891:
778:wasnt made public at the time
638:
627:
616:
605:
594:
282:Chris Cunningham (not at work)
1:
1330:Low-importance Linux articles
1106:of an OS give it notability?
931:http://www.pc-opensystems.com
601:http://www.pc-opensystems.org
109:and see a list of open tasks.
1206:Knowledge:Other stuff exists
1173:Knowledge:Other stuff exists
898:http://www.blacklablinux.org
612:http://www.blacklablinux.org
278:GNU/Linux naming controversy
7:
1277:Changes to proposed article
973:LWN.net Linux Distributions
879:List of Linux distributions
660:GNU/Linux on Power Mac site
225:20:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
115:Knowledge:WikiProject Linux
10:
1356:
1335:WikiProject Linux articles
1310:17:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
1291:18:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1261:23:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1246:19:50, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1200:18:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1185:17:47, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1166:17:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1141:17:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
1116:02:29, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
1101:17:45, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
1067:17:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
1044:15:27, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
1003:00:16, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
788:23:09, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
748:22:39, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
731:22:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
716:22:16, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
699:21:53, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
560:22:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
535:21:33, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
520:17:06, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
504:06:51, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
481:22:37, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
466:22:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
446:21:36, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
429:21:19, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
376:01:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
242:18:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
141:project's importance scale
118:Template:WikiProject Linux
1325:Stub-Class Linux articles
1083:this interesting coverage
1024:comment on proposed edits
289:18:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
276:needlessly reignites the
134:
67:
46:
327:) 00:04, March 19, 2014‎
263:01:59, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
167:The following Knowledge
1305:aka The Red Pen of Doom
1062:aka The Red Pen of Doom
968:Black Lab Linux Website
674:Black Lab Linux Website
28:This article is rated
181:neutral point of view
1213:user:Blank Lab Linux
857:Free software portal
800:Replacement proposed
218:Terra Soft Solutions
173:conflict of interest
1087:Linux distributions
983:PC OpenSystems LLC
829:Linux distribution
669:PC OpenSystems LLC
34:content assessment
1306:
1099:
1063:
836:Yellowdog Linux.
746:
714:
464:
427:
329:
315:comment added by
253:comment added by
205:
204:
155:
154:
151:
150:
147:
146:
98:WikiProject Linux
1347:
1307:
1304:
1215:was blocked for
1093:
1064:
1061:
955:
950:
944:
939:
933:
928:
922:
917:
911:
906:
900:
895:
873:
868:
867:
859:
854:
853:
852:
812:
806:
740:
708:
647:
642:
636:
631:
625:
620:
614:
609:
603:
598:
578:
572:
566:Changes proposed
458:
421:
328:
309:
306:
300:
265:
214:Yellow Dog Linux
164:
163:
157:
123:
122:
119:
116:
113:
92:
87:
86:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
47:
31:
25:
24:
16:
1355:
1354:
1350:
1349:
1348:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1315:
1314:
1302:
1283:Robertojdohnert
1279:
1253:Robertojdohnert
1222:Black Lab Linux
1192:Robertojdohnert
1158:Robertojdohnert
1133:Robertojdohnert
1059:
1026:
995:Robertojdohnert
992:
959:
958:
951:
947:
940:
936:
929:
925:
918:
914:
907:
903:
896:
892:
887:
869:
862:
855:
850:
848:
845:
818:Black Lab Linux
810:
804:
802:
780:Robertojdohnert
691:Ldavidson121975
688:
651:
650:
643:
639:
632:
628:
621:
617:
610:
606:
599:
595:
584:Ubuntu Linux.
576:
570:
568:
547:
527:Ldavidson121975
496:Ldavidson121975
491:
438:Ldavidson121975
394:decision-maker.
317:Robertojdohnert
310:
304:
298:
296:
271:
248:
210:
187:Robertojdohnert
161:
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
88:
81:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
1353:
1343:
1342:
1337:
1332:
1327:
1313:
1312:
1278:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:
1225:
1209:
1187:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1120:
1119:
1118:
1079:
1072:
1025:
1022:
1021:
1020:
991:
990:
985:
980:
975:
970:
964:
963:
962:External links
957:
956:
945:
934:
923:
912:
901:
889:
888:
886:
883:
882:
881:
875:
874:
860:
844:
841:
815:
801:
798:
797:
796:
795:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
768:
767:
766:
765:
764:
763:
762:
761:
687:
686:
681:
676:
671:
666:
662:
656:
655:
654:External links
649:
648:
637:
626:
615:
604:
592:
591:
590:
589:
581:
567:
564:
563:
562:
544:
543:
542:
523:
522:
490:
487:
486:
485:
484:
483:
452:
434:
433:
432:
431:
407:
406:
405:
404:
398:
397:
396:
395:
388:
387:
386:
385:
379:
378:
362:
361:
356:
355:
339:
338:
334:
295:
292:
270:
267:
245:
244:
209:
206:
203:
202:
201:
200:
165:
153:
152:
149:
148:
145:
144:
137:Low-importance
133:
127:
126:
124:
121:Linux articles
107:the discussion
94:
93:
77:
65:
64:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1352:
1341:
1338:
1336:
1333:
1331:
1328:
1326:
1323:
1322:
1320:
1311:
1308:
1299:
1296:Without some
1295:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1288:
1284:
1262:
1258:
1254:
1249:
1248:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1231:
1226:
1223:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1207:
1203:
1202:
1201:
1197:
1193:
1188:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1174:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1154:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1097:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1077:
1073:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1065:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1032:
1031:user:Amatulic
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1000:
996:
989:
986:
984:
981:
979:
976:
974:
971:
969:
966:
965:
961:
960:
954:
949:
943:
938:
932:
927:
921:
916:
910:
905:
899:
894:
890:
880:
877:
876:
872:
866:
861:
858:
847:
840:
837:
833:
830:
827:
823:
822:free software
819:
814:
809:
789:
785:
781:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
759:
755:
751:
750:
749:
744:
739:
734:
733:
732:
728:
724:
719:
718:
717:
712:
707:
703:
702:
701:
700:
696:
692:
685:
682:
680:
677:
675:
672:
670:
667:
665:
663:
661:
658:
657:
653:
652:
646:
641:
635:
630:
624:
619:
613:
608:
602:
597:
593:
587:
586:
585:
580:
575:
561:
557:
553:
549:
548:
539:
538:
537:
536:
532:
528:
521:
517:
513:
508:
507:
506:
505:
501:
497:
482:
478:
474:
469:
468:
467:
462:
457:
453:
450:
449:
448:
447:
443:
439:
430:
425:
420:
415:
411:
410:
409:
408:
402:
401:
400:
399:
392:
391:
390:
389:
383:
382:
381:
380:
377:
373:
369:
364:
363:
358:
357:
353:
349:
345:
341:
340:
335:
332:
331:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
303:
291:
290:
287:
283:
279:
275:
269:Recent revert
266:
264:
260:
256:
252:
243:
240:
237:
234:
229:
228:
227:
226:
223:
219:
215:
198:
195:
192:
188:
185:
184:
182:
178:
177:autobiography
174:
170:
166:
159:
158:
142:
138:
132:
129:
128:
125:
108:
104:
100:
99:
91:
85:
80:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
57:
54:
50:
49:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1280:
1229:
1216:
1204:Again, read
1027:
993:
948:
937:
926:
915:
904:
893:
871:Linux portal
838:
834:
817:
816:
808:request edit
803:
689:
640:
629:
618:
607:
596:
582:
574:request edit
569:
524:
492:
435:
311:— Preceding
302:request edit
297:
294:Edit Request
272:
255:209.6.130.75
249:— Preceding
246:
211:
193:
168:
136:
96:
90:Linux portal
40:WikiProjects
826:open-source
489:New Article
1319:Categories
885:References
588:References
30:Stub-class
978:Linux.com
684:Linux.com
274:This edit
1091:Amatulić
843:See also
738:Amatulić
706:Amatulić
456:Amatulić
419:Amatulić
325:contribs
313:unsigned
251:unsigned
233:Smuckola
197:contribs
1010:Diannaa
679:LWN.net
414:WP:FORK
236:(Email)
222:Cuvtixo
208:Notable
139:on the
1303:TRPoD
1238:Meters
1217:having
1177:Meters
1108:Meters
1076:WP:AFD
1060:TRPoD
1036:Meters
754:Meters
723:Meters
552:Meters
512:Meters
473:Meters
368:Meters
239:(Talk)
179:, and
36:scale.
820:is a
541:full:
112:Linux
103:Linux
59:Linux
1287:talk
1257:talk
1242:talk
1230:need
1196:talk
1181:talk
1162:talk
1137:talk
1112:talk
1096:talk
1040:talk
1014:talk
999:talk
784:talk
758:talk
743:talk
727:talk
711:talk
695:talk
556:talk
531:talk
516:talk
500:talk
477:talk
461:talk
442:talk
424:talk
372:talk
352:here
348:here
344:here
321:talk
286:talk
259:talk
216:and
191:talk
1089:. ~
1057:--
183:.
131:Low
1321::
1289:)
1259:)
1244:)
1236:.
1198:)
1183:)
1175:.
1164:)
1139:)
1114:)
1042:)
1016:)
1001:)
824:,
811:}}
805:{{
786:)
729:)
697:)
577:}}
571:{{
558:)
533:)
518:)
502:)
479:)
444:)
374:)
323:•
305:}}
299:{{
284:-
261:)
175:,
1285:(
1255:(
1240:(
1224:.
1194:(
1179:(
1160:(
1135:(
1110:(
1098:)
1094:(
1038:(
1012:(
997:(
782:(
760:)
756:(
745:)
741:(
725:(
713:)
709:(
693:(
554:(
529:(
514:(
498:(
475:(
463:)
459:(
440:(
426:)
422:(
370:(
319:(
257:(
194:·
189:(
143:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
