Proposal:Notability guidelines for open source software
This proposal is for the development of notability guidelines specific to open source software.
- Identify those aspects of existing notability guidelines that are appropriate for open source software.
- Develop new notability guidelines that are appropriate for open source software where no existing guidelines are applicable.
- Combine all guidelines into a single reference document.
Wikipedia:Notability has very little to offer that might apply to any software product, except the following under Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies):
- The "secondary sources" in the criterion include reliable published works in all forms, such as (for example) newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations.
- Microsoft Word satisfies this criterion because people who are wholly independent of Microsoft have written books about it.
It is uncommon for open source software to have books or other published works written about it, so some other measures are needed.
In the absence of reliable secondary sources, what other factors might indicate notability for an open source software product?
What weight can be given to each of the following characteristics?
- The software is the first of its type.
- The software is regarded by knowledgable IT professionals as one of the best of its type.
- The software has achieved significant acceptance by the user community.
- The software provides a significant improvement over its predecessors and/or competitors.
A small number of "undeserving" software products may become the subject of articles.
Do you have a thought about this proposal? A suggestion? Discuss this proposal by going to Proposal talk:Notability guidelines for open source software.
Want to work on this proposal?
- .. Sign your name here!