Norton Internet Security was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Norton Internet Security:
|
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I will be reviewing this article shortly. Techman224 Talk 23:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
A good article is— </noinclude>
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Starts GA Reassessment. The reassessment will follow the same sections of the Article.
Hopefully the review will begin soon. Thank you-- Whiteguru ( talk) 08:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Result: Delisted. Legitimate concerns, no opposition or improvements made -- Whiteguru ( talk) 12:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Instructions: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment
Honestly, this should probably be delisted - Very significant work is needed. Significant uncited text is present. There is also a weighting issue - version before 2013 are described in great detail, while post-2013 ones have little detail. The criticism section makes it seem like post-2009 version of this software have no critics. Reference formatting errors. This needs a lot of work. Hog Farm Talk 06:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Norton Internet Security was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Norton Internet Security:
|
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I will be reviewing this article shortly. Techman224 Talk 23:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
A good article is— </noinclude>
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Starts GA Reassessment. The reassessment will follow the same sections of the Article.
Hopefully the review will begin soon. Thank you-- Whiteguru ( talk) 08:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Result: Delisted. Legitimate concerns, no opposition or improvements made -- Whiteguru ( talk) 12:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Instructions: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment
Honestly, this should probably be delisted - Very significant work is needed. Significant uncited text is present. There is also a weighting issue - version before 2013 are described in great detail, while post-2013 ones have little detail. The criticism section makes it seem like post-2009 version of this software have no critics. Reference formatting errors. This needs a lot of work. Hog Farm Talk 06:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)