Talk:Ptolemy Project

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Systems Mid‑importance

	Systems science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the field of Systems engineering.

Notability edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Full Disclosure: I work on the Ptolemy Project.

The page was marked with "notability", "self-published" and "third-party" tags (within "multiple issues"). Below are my comments:

Notability: The project is notable because a peer reviewed paper (Eker et. al., "[| Taming heterogeneity-the Ptolemy approach]" is from a refereed journal (Proceedings of the IEEE). The link for the citation is to the CHESS website so that people can download the article for free. Searching Google Scholar for "Ptolemy model of computation" yields 1770 hits.

Self-published: The page was started in 2006 by an editor with a similar name as someone who worked on the project. So, yes, this page could be considered self-published. That student has since left the group.

WP:THIRDPARTY: "A third-party source is reliable if it has standards of peer review and fact-checking. In general, the more people engaged in checking facts, the more reliable the publication." Google Scholar shows that Eker et. al. has 878 citations, so at least some third parties have noted it.
- Reliable: Eker et. al was peer-reviewed and presumably at least some of the 878 citations were also peer-reviewe
- Third-party: " A third-party source is independent and unaffiliated with the subject, thus excluding first-party sources such as self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, and promotional materials." At least some of the 878 citations would meet the third-party requirement.
- Sources: "At least two third-party sources should cover the subject, to avoid idiosyncratic articles based upon a single perspective." There are at least two third-party sources.
- Based upon: "These reliable third-party sources should verify enough facts to write a non-stub article about the subject, including a statement explaining its significance." I'd have to look to find specific sources that would have enough to write a non-stub article.

I believe I have addressed most of the issues raised by the questions and am thus going to remove them.Cxbrx (talk) 00:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)Reply