Talk:EFnet

message: Aitvaras links to nothing like an IRC network - either create a page for it or remove that entry? (clem 23:18, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Aitvaras

message: If there is some dispute about this you can talk about this here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonapro (talk • contribs) 09:12, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether or not there are guidelines, the POV stuff about "EFNet continuing to 'loose' credibility" due to "substandard ops" is inappropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.1.48.108 (talk • contribs) 17:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Unless you have an unbiased source which documents EFnet operator behavior, that paragraph is exactly the sort of thing forbidden under WP:NPOV. AKADriver 20:29, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The link you provided actually says those guidelines apply only to EFnet operators, while your statement implies the opposite (that they apply to everyone but EFnet operators).  Granted, it is 9 years old, and I know IRC networks have changed a lot since then.  Even so, they were guidelines to begin with, not steadfast policies.  You've also made an unprovable statement when you say that all EFnet operators do not follow those guidelines. — AKADriver ☎ 20:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  EFnet ops have no guidelines 

message: It is great that EFnet have some servers that use IPv6. Too bad none support SSL, I would love to see that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frap (talk • contribs) 19:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: SSL is good for giving people a false sense of security. I'd be more worried about currupt irc server admins than network snifing if i was discussing anything really secret on irc.  Plugwash 16:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPv6 and SSL 

message: if you going to remove 1 legit site you had better remove them all str33tshen -- very upset -- co-owner of ufc-pride.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by Str33tshen (talk • contribs) 15:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove them all

message: You may be interested to see the less reengineered version of history concerning the IRC war that produced EFnet. http://about.psyc.eu/IRC#The_Battle_Of_Eris_-_The_War_Of_IRC  --lynX 22:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This "history" is quite biased. But yes, there are many sides to the story. -- Wumpus Greg 18:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not implying that at all. It's biased as it doesn't meet fact in some ways -- one point of a Wikipedia article is not just to repeat the hysterical accusations of the heat of the moment, but also look at fact. I'm glad you liked my joke. -- wumpus Greg 23:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Um, Duh. An architecture which permits server open without compromising security is a fine way to solve the problem. That was obvious 15 years ago, too. Doesn't have much to do with this Wikipedia article, though. -- wumpus Greg 02:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IRC was never decentralised in the way that smtp and jabber are, it relies on replicating the entire network state to every node in the network, a fragile tree of persistant connections and almost total trust between servers. Those who wanted a workable decentralised network needed to start more or less from scratch. Plugwash 01:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the elementary tutorial on IRC, I am aware of this. I could show you all the design documents of what I was thinking about doing to IRC, however, I went to work on my PhD instead. What's this have to do with this article? -- wumpus Greg 16:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What possibly really happened to eris 

message: User count on efnet is closer to 70 thousand than 100,000. IRWolfie- 01:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Client Counts 

message: Whoever the anonymous user from choopa.net is whom keeps spamming the external links needs to stop.
stats.efnet.org is already listed once, no need to add 4 more deep links.  The user is also trying to hijack the link to map.efnet.org after making a carbon copy of the site.  Seems like this user has a real desire to push stats.efnet.org.
STOP SPAMMING WIKIPEDIA
It would be nice for this article to become protected or semi protected until this stops.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Capeworm (talk • contribs) 20:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EXTERNAL LINK SPAM FROM CHOOPA.NET 

message: This article has been semi-protected as per a request at WP:RFP. Anonymous users, please register accounts and discuss changes to the article here on its talk page before making potentially contentious edits. A Train take the 14:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection 

message: Wikipedia fooled by April's fools?
"Undernet has decided to rejoin EFNET, and EFNET is to change thier name to EFUnet."
Well, this piece of "news" was posted on Efnet.org "posted on 03/31/2007 at 23:43:32 EDT by Pills", dangerously close to April 1st.
I'm removing this line from the page. -- Tor I. Pettersen
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.160.171.98 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: April's fools

message: It has been proposed that Noppa is merged into the EFnet article. However, I don't see any mention of bots in the article. This leads me to question if the bot is notable enough for an article. A quick google search doesn't come up with much, but maybe others can bring up something more. Being the first bot on EFnet does assert some sort of notabilitiy. If we can verify that, a merge could be appropriate. Martijn Hoekstra 22:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  See IRC bot - it seems to me it would be more appropriate to merge Noppa there. MartinBrook t 13:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noppa merge 

message: http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=efnet+irc&hl=en&sa=N&start=10 - There are several mainstream news sources (including NYTimes and Deutche Welle) and plenty of reasonably reliable news blogs that have some level of coverage of EFNet - If someone's interested in getting rid of that 4 month old unreferenced-template, there's how to do it. Expand and source your expansions. Happy editing, MrZaiustalk 16:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: News sources

message: Are you kidding? EFnet is the original IRC network, used by tens of millions of people since the creation of IRC. Frogfork (talk) 10:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: New sections go at the bottom... You should put your arguments here otherwise they won't count. --Hm2k (talk) 11:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Deletion? UHH? 

message: the article appears to have been written with the pov of an experienced irc user. this type of article isn't necessary on wikipedia since it serves a very small portion of readers. a re-write of the article with the assumption that it's basically a living person with constantly changing figures would be more in line since citing user/channel counts that are constantly on the decline isn't relevant.Woods01 (talk) 04:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). --Hm2k (talk) 09:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  article pov 

message: "In July 1996, disagreement on policy caused EFnet to break in two: the slightly larger European half (including Australia and Japan) formed IRCnet, while the American servers continued as EFnet. This was widely known as the Great Split [3]." -- according to the source, European part was actually smaller than EFNet's. But it contained .fi hub, from which IRC originates. --194.149.88.193 (talk) 15:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is any more detailed information on the relative size available?  In any case, I believe the split was roughly half/half, with the original IRC server being among those that split off, which makes the claim that the present EFnet is the continuation of the original IRC network somewhat contentious. Rp (talk) 18:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline/The Great Split 

message: Hey,
I recently removed some errors regarding the operations of efnet.
As an efnet admin for over a decade, I might be of service, should you have any additional questions. Feel free to ask, and I will do my best to give you correct information.
For the sake of the network and the future of IRC, I think it is important we keep this document as up to date and correct as possible.
So, questions?
Best regards,
Johan 'Silence' Boger.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jboger (talk • contribs) 07:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions regarding the current state of efnet. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on EFnet. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110322175909/http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/ircd/ircopguide.html to http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/ircd/ircopguide.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:51, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "In July 2001, after a string of DDoS attacks[6] a service called CHANFIX[7]" shows the quoted DDoS attacks as outdated when you visit the link.  There is nothing but advertising left.  Should be removed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CB:3FFF:BE8:0:0:0:0 (talk) 09:15, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cited sources outdated 

message: It would be interesting to know the highest number of online users and when that occurred, if anyone knows of any reliable sources for such data.  I came here wondering when EFnet was at the height of its popularity, and that's one piece of info that could shed some light. 137.254.7.165 (talk) 17:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: netsplit.de is still going strong ... Rp (talk) 15:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highest User Count