Talk:SonicWall

message: Corporate pages are fine reference for certain info... but they don't tell us what products are notable. They simply tell us what products they are trying to promote at a given time. Though we can use product descriptions ot's preferable to get product descriptions from reliable third-parties (ie: NOT WEBSPAM). But all the same, corporate only sources wont EVER tell us what is notable or not (for the previously mentioned reason). Their promotional activities may in the long run influence what is notable if they have a successful promotional campaign but that's not our place here in an encyclopedia! Retran (talk) 06:06, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Corporate Sources (sources from the vendors themselves)

message: :Image:SonicwallBlue thumb.gif is not being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SonicwallBlue thumb.gif

message: The entire limitations of filtering should be removed or adjusted as newer firmware released supports SSL proxy to filter within SSL connections. Due to this, the statement mentioned in the wiki page is wrong. Please see the release notes on their site  Remarks999 (talk) 18:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the page, it's a list of things it can classify and filter.  My objection is not about censorship or what it is/means, my objection is that it has nothing to do with the article about this company. Q T C 09:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: How is it relavent? This company provides an appliance that can filter things. What people do with it is beyond the scope of this article.  Q T C 09:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I'm not disputing that, however this article is about the company not the product. Q T C 10:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I still strongly disagree with the entire "Limitations of filtering" section. It is mostly unsourced, and the sources we have don't mention SonicWALL at all - that's not surprising since the section itself isn't really SonicWALL-specific. It reads like a how-to guide guide, expressly discouraged per WP:NOT#HOWTO. It also puts an undue emphasis on a small section of SonicWALL's products - we have about as much information on how to circumvent one of their product lines as on all the company's product lines combined. It's as if the hypothetical handgun article 213.137.6.159 mentions above (or, more precisely, the article on the handgun manufacturing company) had as much information on bulletproof vests as on firearms. I also disagree with the "if in doubt, include it" motto - by Wikipedia's policies the burden of proof is on those who want content included, not on those who want it removed. Huon (talk) 13:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I like the shortened version by Q. The undue emphasis has been reduced, the irrelevant proxy server lists are gone, and it actually focuses on what the SonicWALL products can and can't do. Now a secondary source would be nice, but I doubt we'll find one. Huon (talk) 16:41, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Since the text added by 88.203.71.26 is the version I claimed to like back in June, I didn't remove it, but it still suffers of the same old two defects: We don't have a secondary source (or any source, for that matter), and it's not really SonicWALL-specific. Could we at least get a source? If not, I might change my mind and prefer complete removal of this section just for a lack of sources. Huon (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limitations of filtering 

message: I saw a PC in an office that had a McAfee icon in the system tray. When clicked, it brought up SonicWALL, but other text stated that it was from McAfee.  ????  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.236.37 (talk) 14:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  relationship to McAfee 

message: What in the world is "Business Continuity"? The term is not self-evident, and I imagine it is especially non-evident to a reader with no exposure to SonicWALL marketing or specialized business education. As the article is written, just how SonicWALL devices implement Business Continuity is unexplained and mysterious. This claim needs to be justified and explained better or be removed, lest the article be in violation of wikipedia's WP:NPOV (neutral point-of-view) policy. The claim would just serve promotional purposes otherwise. If I see no justification put forward, and I can't find justification very easily myself which can be cited, I will remove it. Retran (talk) 07:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Business Continuity / Business Units

message: This screams "promotional" and non-neutral. I'm removing the whole "Partnerships" section since it contains only one entry, without any explanation as to what it is. When I visit the link its a page with a slew of corporate logos with this small explanation of what ProCurve is "Leading appliance or independent software vendors work with ProCurve to create applications, which together with ProCurve's network foundation allow customers to deploy tested or pre-integrated best-in-class solutions." Sounds basically non-noteworthy, and completely promotional. Removed per WP:NPOV. Retran (talk) 08:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  HP ProCurve Solutions Alliance 

message: Should the external links of a Wikipedia article on a company (SonicWALL in this case) all lead to company controlled web pages? Why not just narrow it down to one link, their official link? It seems like all the others serve only to generate promotion to their different web pages. The only important link I can find in the list, is the main one (sonicwall.com). All the rest are easily accessible from the main company page, and/or are redundant. That's why I'm removing them. Retran (talk) 08:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree and disagree on this point. We allow some links where useful or informative: e.g., a whitepaper or about page or other document within the site. We want to limit the number of corp links only when it appears abusive. Today, I see some expired links so I'm repairing them. Wikieditor 3833 MUnderwood 00:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Is it normal for a good Wikipedia article to list a barrage of certifications, with absolutely no description in plain language as to what they mean? Especially when they are certifications of a very narrow-interest? Were they added here to simply expand the size of this article, or is it notable and important, each one of them? If all of them are notable enough for inclusion, there is a lot of work to be done to describe what these certifications are and what in the world it means to the reader. Retran (talk) 08:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:   Certifications 

message: I am getting frustrated with this article. Is this company notable simply because its listed on a major stock exchange? Most of the stuff in here is put in here just to have content. For instance, if IBM, or Apple's wiki page contained pending hardware/software certifications it would be absurd and miles long.Retran (talk) 14:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Advertisement Issue Resolution

message: i added that cencership post, hope u like it, probly got some grammer errors in it, im not much of a english student. ;)
:Unfortunately, it's not appropriate for wikipedia -- all content has to respect WP:NPOV and WP:CITE. Reporting someone else's (notable) opinions about SonicWALL is fine, but simply adding your own feelings is not OK. Sdedeo (tips) 19:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: censorship section that was removed

message: Please see also Category talk:Announced technology acquisitions, please feel free to come with a better method of following announced take-overs Tonkie (talk) 23:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Announced technology acquisitions 

message: I used a computer today to search for information online and followed a link from the search programme results to "The Sun" newspaper in Britain. I discovered that the computer in question was running SonicWall when it blocked my attempt to read one of Britain's best-selling newspapers, citing the reason: Block reason: Forbidden Category "Intimate Apparel/Swimsuit". I rolled my eyes in disbelief. — O'Dea (talk) 10:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Censorious