This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't like how Macintosh's Trash can is mentioned before Microsoft's Recycle bin. I presume this is bias and therefore suggest we list them in alphabetical order (i.e. Recycle Bin before Trash can).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.141.183.13 ( talk • contribs) 01:02, 25 October 2006
How is NTFS regarding undeletion?
Needs a list of undelete software, which OS it's for, which it runs under, and whether it is freeware/shareware/$ware and open-source or not.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.182.35 (Talk) ( talk • contribs) 00:16, 15 December 2006
Is this statement fair?
"Undeletion was supported by MS-DOS, but is not supported by most modern UNIX file systems"
What about Testdisk and PhotoRec?
I was going to give up goggling for UNIX undelete tools after reading that statement but now am not sure that its true.
Maybe if it was said Unix operating systems are not generally bundled with Undeletetion support but tools have arisen such as Testdisk and PhotoRec?
Or is there something I am misunderstanding here?
I also want to ask what is "Undeletion was supported by MS-DOS"? Microsoft provides knowledge base article on how to undelete files from MS-DOS? It is supported by Microsoft?
And for ext3 undelete, this article shows even some of the most common believes are fake, even though they are explicitly told by ext3 author. 221.126.146.108 ( talk) 13:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Many people in the world believe that the correct term for 'undelete' is in actual fact 'restore'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.22.151.244 ( talk) 14:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
In the history and Talk:Undeletion#NTFS_undeletion above, I see some conflict about whether to list specific tools. Some (but not all) additions seem to be linkspam, although I didn't check.
I believe it would help to clarify whether/where/which undeletion tools should be listed. Example phrases I imagine might suit a template,
Is there such a template? Is it necessary to form a policy first? I believe the lack of an explicit policy has allowed space for conflict. -- Silicosaurus ( talk) 22:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Undeletion. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Much of the article is written assuming undeletion works in the same way it does on FAT file systems: some or all of the metadata is preserved if not yet overwritten, and may be recovered. Mention is made of other systems, but some paragraphs appear to ignore them. Also, "Undeletion is possible on all FAT file systems" is rather too strong a statement; a more balanced view is given elsewhere, but... well, the whole article wants editing for presentation quality. Snapshotting filesystems are mentioned under a heading of "Graphical Systems" which is absurd but probably not intentional. More tentatively, a longer list of snapshotting filesystems might be nice. I'd do it all myself but I'm not quite with it now. eekee ( talk) 14:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I don't like how Macintosh's Trash can is mentioned before Microsoft's Recycle bin. I presume this is bias and therefore suggest we list them in alphabetical order (i.e. Recycle Bin before Trash can).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.141.183.13 ( talk • contribs) 01:02, 25 October 2006
How is NTFS regarding undeletion?
Needs a list of undelete software, which OS it's for, which it runs under, and whether it is freeware/shareware/$ware and open-source or not.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.182.35 (Talk) ( talk • contribs) 00:16, 15 December 2006
Is this statement fair?
"Undeletion was supported by MS-DOS, but is not supported by most modern UNIX file systems"
What about Testdisk and PhotoRec?
I was going to give up goggling for UNIX undelete tools after reading that statement but now am not sure that its true.
Maybe if it was said Unix operating systems are not generally bundled with Undeletetion support but tools have arisen such as Testdisk and PhotoRec?
Or is there something I am misunderstanding here?
I also want to ask what is "Undeletion was supported by MS-DOS"? Microsoft provides knowledge base article on how to undelete files from MS-DOS? It is supported by Microsoft?
And for ext3 undelete, this article shows even some of the most common believes are fake, even though they are explicitly told by ext3 author. 221.126.146.108 ( talk) 13:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Many people in the world believe that the correct term for 'undelete' is in actual fact 'restore'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.22.151.244 ( talk) 14:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
In the history and Talk:Undeletion#NTFS_undeletion above, I see some conflict about whether to list specific tools. Some (but not all) additions seem to be linkspam, although I didn't check.
I believe it would help to clarify whether/where/which undeletion tools should be listed. Example phrases I imagine might suit a template,
Is there such a template? Is it necessary to form a policy first? I believe the lack of an explicit policy has allowed space for conflict. -- Silicosaurus ( talk) 22:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Undeletion. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Much of the article is written assuming undeletion works in the same way it does on FAT file systems: some or all of the metadata is preserved if not yet overwritten, and may be recovered. Mention is made of other systems, but some paragraphs appear to ignore them. Also, "Undeletion is possible on all FAT file systems" is rather too strong a statement; a more balanced view is given elsewhere, but... well, the whole article wants editing for presentation quality. Snapshotting filesystems are mentioned under a heading of "Graphical Systems" which is absurd but probably not intentional. More tentatively, a longer list of snapshotting filesystems might be nice. I'd do it all myself but I'm not quite with it now. eekee ( talk) 14:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)