Wikipedia

User talk:Drcarver/CoSign by ARX

< User talk:Drcarver
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Yunshui in topic Sources

Sources

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago12 comments3 people in discussion

@Drcarver: Hey, just using this as a bit of a messageboard. The article doesn't look bad, but it'd probably be good to have someone experienced with writing computer and technology themed articles to help you with the basic flow. It could still be seen as a bit promotional, but that would require re-writing some of the more technical things without losing the actual meaning, which I'm not always the best at and I can't entirely see how else we could phrase it. The bigger problem I saw was with the sourcing, as it looks to be almost entirely primary when you get down to it. (Press releases, database entries, listings at websites for companies that do business with CoSign) I'm not familiar with DataManager.it, so that could be usable as long as it isn't based too heavily on a press release. The big test would be if it passes muster with the people who frequent WP:RS/N. It looks like it might, but we'd still have problems with notability since it looks to be the only truly independent source on the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Tokyogirl79: Thanks for the response. Sorry for my delay - was a bit busy with other stuff and didn't look for a while. I'll see what I can do about the sourcing - if there *is* anything else out there that references CoSign. Drcarver (talk) 07:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Tokyogirl79: Hi Tokyogirl! I was able to find other sources that referenced Cosign - and they're now included. Would you mind taking a look at the article now and telling me what you think? I left the other "less notable" sources in [PR, databases, partner sites], in addition to all the new ones. Should they stay there or be taken out? Thanks! Drcarver (talk) 08:37, 23 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

  • @Drcarver: Hmm... I'd run Legal IT Professionals through WP:RS/N to see what they think. It looks like it may be usable, but a second opinion would be best in this instance just to make. The BioIT and Engineering News articles both look to be usable as they seem to have an editorial board, but it wouldn't be a terrible idea to ask about those as well just to have a second opinion. The other new links are all either press releases or things that would be considered primary since they're postings by people/organizations that use the software and they'd be seen as just notifications that they use it. It's still a little light on the coverage so I'd recommend getting more before moving this to the mainspace, but some other articles like the three listed above would be what you really need to look for. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:36, 23 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Tokyogirl79: I asked on WP:RS/N about the reliability of Legal IT Professionals, BioIT and Engineering News (for the content they are used as citations for), but it's been a few days and no response. In the meantime I've found another 2 secondary sources to add (ref 1 and 12), so maybe makes sense to move it at this stage? Drcarver (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

  • Hmm... I think I may try to get someone from the computer WikiProject to come take a look at this one to decide on these two sources. ComputerWorld is reliable, but the article is sort of not exactly about the program itself. Yet I can see where it does give some sort of notability. The Tech Radar source seems to be about ARX in general and digital signatures in general, so I can see people arguing against that one. I'm going to try to bring in a second person on this just to kind of give a look at the whole thing, just in case I'm being a little overly harsh on judging sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • @Tokyogirl79: Thanks so much for all the effort! Drcarver (talk) 21:06, 29 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Tokyogirl79: Hi - just wanted to check if you had managed to get any feedback on the sources. Thanks! Drcarver (talk) 08:17, 5 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Caveat first: this is so far outside my area of expertise that it might as well be written in Telugu. That said, having looked at the sources, I'm seeing mostly blogs, interviews with primary parties, press releases, passing mentions - nothing there hits the magic button of inclusion for me. My gut feeling, for what it's worth, is that there's enough out there to warrant an article about ARX, but probably not enough to make CoSign itself notable. Yunshui 雲水 15:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drcarver/CoSign_by_ARX&oldid=633391598"