This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Libreboot 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 |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I think this is the main dispute on this talk page and AfD. It should be concluded in this RfC. I encourage people to cast their vote here:
PhotographyEdits ( talk) 08:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
there were arguments that libreboot doesn't meet WP:GNG in the past.
i've done a release recently, via libreboot.org. i'm doing more over the coming months and probably another one soon in coming weeks. anyway, here's some coverage from google for the recent release (released on 25 June 2023):
https://goodtech.info/ce-quil-faut-savoir-sur-le-nouveau-libreboot-20230625/
https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/libreboot-20230625-gets-support-for-new-hardware/
https://www.linux-magazin.de/news/libreboot-20230625-unterstuetzt-weitere-mainboards/
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/late-night-linux-family-all-episodes/id1381229825 -- that's the podcast https://www-edivaldobrito-com-br.translate.goog/libreboot-20230625-lancado-com-suporte-a-mais-sistemas-antigos/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp
https://www.linux-magazin.de/news/libreboot-20230625-unterstuetzt-weitere-mainboards/
https://9to5linux.com/libreboot-open-source-bios-uefi-replacement-gets-support-for-new-hardware
https://www.omglinux.com/new-libreboot-stable-release/
https://www.getgnu.org/yazilim/libreboot-20230625-duyuruldu.html
https://www.linuxcompatible.org/story/libreboot-20230625-released/
https://www.oschina.net/news/246931/libreboot-20230625-released
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Libreboot-20230625
https://www.ilsoftware.it/libreboot-cose-e-come-funziona-il-sostituito-dei-bios-proprietari/
and that's just after like 2 minutes of googling that i found these. have fun with them. Libreleah ( talk) 15:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Gluglug has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16 § Gluglug until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
04:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Libiquity Taurinus has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16 § Libiquity Taurinus until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
04:50, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
https://web.archive.org/web/20240320191421/https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00036.html
shows in part a user there called Leah Rowe typed about
"The Free Software Foundation recently fired a transgendered employee ofthe FSF, just for being trans, because some transphobic cissexist peoplewrote negativly about her."
Though does anyone know where to find proof that any employee was fired by the FSF just for identifying as a "trans" person?
Or that any "transphobic cissexist" wrote negativly about the fired employee.
If it was in writing, it is likely shown somewhere.
And what was the complaint that was made?
Maybe it was about something other than "being trans" that was wrote by those that Leah Rowe called "transphobic cissexist" people.
Or was the employee not fired "just for being trans" and there may have been more to what happened than what this mail shows?
If anyone knows a link to a website, document, or any other information about any dispute between the person called Leah Rowe and the Free Software Foundation it may help people find out what happened.
I did see this link on the page, but do not know if any information about a possible dispute between the person called Leah Rowe and the Free Software Foundation should be placed here or at some other page.
I do not wish to have "Misrepresentation of other people" or "personal attacks"as shown at
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable
in an article, or it's references, if it is not about the page topic, though I do not know how to handle this link as it also shows information about Libreboot.
Maybe these links can also help
https://web.archive.org/web/20230610020636/https://fossforce.com/2016/09/fsf-says-firing-wasnt-discrimatory/
https://web.archive.org/web/20230610020636/https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00052.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20230528221851/https://www.fsf.org/news/free-software-foundation-statement
Though I do not know much about what happened. Maybe more information can be found to see what was typed about on each side of the dispute, if that can help improve this article, or at least Wikipedia.
I have before edited this page, and some other pages, I do not know if that means I now "declared a connection" to what I edited before. Other Cody ( talk) 23:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Is it legal for companies or others to make forks or/and ship forks of Libreboot or does using the name break any Libreboot trademark, as a "Hostile fork" was typed about?
If so maybe a trademark section is needed.
I do not know what a "Hostile fork" is seeing almost all freely licensed programs, that I know of at least as of now, also let their program's name be used by others, even if the program was edited as people can just check the source code repository of the programmers or main website to see if it was from the main programmers or from others.
So maybe a criticism or controversy section about what any developers have typed?
I think programs under GPL3 can be legally forked, but maybe there are also trademarks in the name so people need to edit that name out, though Gnu Boot did change the name, to avoid problems with using that name, I think.
So should any "Hostile fork" information be put in a trademark, criticism, controversy, or other section like some other articles have, or still be in the History section?
If there are legal things with the name Libreboot a trademark section may be needed like
https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Trademark
has.
Or criticism or controversy section like some articles have?
Though I also see
https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground
But I do not know if I should have placed this in the history section, as it was typed about as a Libreboot name history thing, as Gnu Boot I think was also made near the time, or if this is more like a criticism by Libreboot developers against Gnu Boot, or something like that.
I think Wikipedia is like an encyclopedia not other things, but I do not know the best way to have this information in certain sections.
Or the best way for history like things like this to be typed about on Wikipedia.
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Libreboot 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 |
Archives:
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I think this is the main dispute on this talk page and AfD. It should be concluded in this RfC. I encourage people to cast their vote here:
PhotographyEdits ( talk) 08:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
there were arguments that libreboot doesn't meet WP:GNG in the past.
i've done a release recently, via libreboot.org. i'm doing more over the coming months and probably another one soon in coming weeks. anyway, here's some coverage from google for the recent release (released on 25 June 2023):
https://goodtech.info/ce-quil-faut-savoir-sur-le-nouveau-libreboot-20230625/
https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/libreboot-20230625-gets-support-for-new-hardware/
https://www.linux-magazin.de/news/libreboot-20230625-unterstuetzt-weitere-mainboards/
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/late-night-linux-family-all-episodes/id1381229825 -- that's the podcast https://www-edivaldobrito-com-br.translate.goog/libreboot-20230625-lancado-com-suporte-a-mais-sistemas-antigos/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=wapp
https://www.linux-magazin.de/news/libreboot-20230625-unterstuetzt-weitere-mainboards/
https://9to5linux.com/libreboot-open-source-bios-uefi-replacement-gets-support-for-new-hardware
https://www.omglinux.com/new-libreboot-stable-release/
https://www.getgnu.org/yazilim/libreboot-20230625-duyuruldu.html
https://www.linuxcompatible.org/story/libreboot-20230625-released/
https://www.oschina.net/news/246931/libreboot-20230625-released
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Libreboot-20230625
https://www.ilsoftware.it/libreboot-cose-e-come-funziona-il-sostituito-dei-bios-proprietari/
and that's just after like 2 minutes of googling that i found these. have fun with them. Libreleah ( talk) 15:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Gluglug has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16 § Gluglug until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
04:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Libiquity Taurinus has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 16 § Libiquity Taurinus until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
04:50, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
https://web.archive.org/web/20240320191421/https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00036.html
shows in part a user there called Leah Rowe typed about
"The Free Software Foundation recently fired a transgendered employee ofthe FSF, just for being trans, because some transphobic cissexist peoplewrote negativly about her."
Though does anyone know where to find proof that any employee was fired by the FSF just for identifying as a "trans" person?
Or that any "transphobic cissexist" wrote negativly about the fired employee.
If it was in writing, it is likely shown somewhere.
And what was the complaint that was made?
Maybe it was about something other than "being trans" that was wrote by those that Leah Rowe called "transphobic cissexist" people.
Or was the employee not fired "just for being trans" and there may have been more to what happened than what this mail shows?
If anyone knows a link to a website, document, or any other information about any dispute between the person called Leah Rowe and the Free Software Foundation it may help people find out what happened.
I did see this link on the page, but do not know if any information about a possible dispute between the person called Leah Rowe and the Free Software Foundation should be placed here or at some other page.
I do not wish to have "Misrepresentation of other people" or "personal attacks"as shown at
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Behavior_that_is_unacceptable
in an article, or it's references, if it is not about the page topic, though I do not know how to handle this link as it also shows information about Libreboot.
Maybe these links can also help
https://web.archive.org/web/20230610020636/https://fossforce.com/2016/09/fsf-says-firing-wasnt-discrimatory/
https://web.archive.org/web/20230610020636/https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libreboot/2016-09/msg00052.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20230528221851/https://www.fsf.org/news/free-software-foundation-statement
Though I do not know much about what happened. Maybe more information can be found to see what was typed about on each side of the dispute, if that can help improve this article, or at least Wikipedia.
I have before edited this page, and some other pages, I do not know if that means I now "declared a connection" to what I edited before. Other Cody ( talk) 23:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Is it legal for companies or others to make forks or/and ship forks of Libreboot or does using the name break any Libreboot trademark, as a "Hostile fork" was typed about?
If so maybe a trademark section is needed.
I do not know what a "Hostile fork" is seeing almost all freely licensed programs, that I know of at least as of now, also let their program's name be used by others, even if the program was edited as people can just check the source code repository of the programmers or main website to see if it was from the main programmers or from others.
So maybe a criticism or controversy section about what any developers have typed?
I think programs under GPL3 can be legally forked, but maybe there are also trademarks in the name so people need to edit that name out, though Gnu Boot did change the name, to avoid problems with using that name, I think.
So should any "Hostile fork" information be put in a trademark, criticism, controversy, or other section like some other articles have, or still be in the History section?
If there are legal things with the name Libreboot a trademark section may be needed like
https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_kernel#Trademark
has.
Or criticism or controversy section like some articles have?
Though I also see
https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_battleground
But I do not know if I should have placed this in the history section, as it was typed about as a Libreboot name history thing, as Gnu Boot I think was also made near the time, or if this is more like a criticism by Libreboot developers against Gnu Boot, or something like that.
I think Wikipedia is like an encyclopedia not other things, but I do not know the best way to have this information in certain sections.
Or the best way for history like things like this to be typed about on Wikipedia.