Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MRISC32

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. If the page creator wants a copy of the article content or to work on it in User space, let me know. Liz Read! Talk! 21:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MRISC32

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

MRISC32 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Great project, but it does not seem to pass any notability criteria. MarioGom (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The main reason for creating the page was to have a stub that can be filled out by others over time, and have a reference to link to from other Wikipedia articles (there were already a few links/mentions before the article was created).
In writing the article I tried my best to present objective facts (i.e. follow Wikipedia:Neutral point of view), as well as follow the pillars Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research.
Regarding notability: While the architecture has yet to see widespread use, some notable parts are:
  • The ISA is open and royalty free under a very liberal license (much more accessible/liberal than OpenRISC, OpenPOWER etc).
  • The architecture is a vector processor, of which there are few around today, especially open-source architectures.
  • It is well documented, proven, has a complete and modern GNU Compiler Collection toolchain and a simulator, unlike most hobby architecture projects.
I believe that the main value of the article is to explain and acknowledge the existence of the ISA, in a world where there are only about a handful of truly open and royalty free modern ISAs (and even less vector processor ISAs). Its purpose is not to promote the architecture (there are no financial benefits or similar connected to the project). Marcus256 (talk) 07:24, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Marcus256: Please, see the general notability guideline. Notability is judged by the availability of reliable secondary sources about the topic, which do not seem to exist here. MarioGom (talk) 10:26, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I am aware of the lack of secondary, independent sources. These are, however, often hard to come by for many open-source projects, as the primary source is community driven and where all the information is. E.g. see Simple DirectMedia Layer and LZ4 (compression algorithm) (two open-source projects off the top of my head): most sources are primary (either direct links to project GitHub pages or blog articles by the authors).
I would also argue that hardware open-source projects naturally have a much lower uptake/spread compared to software open-source projects, which tends to skew notability (coverage, sources) in proportion to other merits (technical, innovation, quality etc).
Anyway. Would a more stripped down stub make more sense in this case (until more secondary sources are available)? I'm fine with the article being deleted, but I think that it would be a shame (the information is objective and useful). Marcus256 (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is this your project? Also, there is literally 0 coverage. For comparison something like OpenSSL has loads of coverage! Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's my project that has been in the making for about five years. That's why I wanted to keep it as a stub to avoid bias (but I got carried away and added some content too - it's OK if most of the content was dropped if that would make the article less biased). Hm, OpenSSL is a critical security component of every Android phone and Linux system (most web/cloud servers) etc in the world, so it's bound to have lots of coverage. While I'd love to see MRISC32 be as popular I won't hold my breath (it's not a popularity contest, I hope).
I realise that there's very low coverage from traditional news sources etc, which is of course a problem. For reference, here are some primary & community sources (just to give a better feeling of the scope of the project):
GitHub repos:
Blog articles:
Homepage:
Discussion forums:
Mentions:
Media:
Marcus256 (talk) 10:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I beg you Marcus256, read COI because this is one gigantic COI! Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 11:58, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dear WngLdr34, don't get me wrong, I'm honestly trying to understand what's OK and not w.r.t. COI. I get that there's a potential COI here, but the thing is that this is an open-source project without any financial benefits (it's actually the opposite), there's no competition (by definition), and my person is not mentioned nor do I gain/lose personally from the presence of the Wikipedia article. The article on COI editing that you linked does not seem to cover this? The sole purpose is to improve Wikipedia by providing a missing article (from the POV of an SME if you will - I do have the education background and experience). I guess I'm trying to understand what the COI policy/definition is on things like open-source work.
As I've said before I'm fine with having the article deleted, but I'd like to learn something along the way too. Marcus256 (talk) 12:56, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, are you primarily objecting to the presence of the article, or the contents of the article, or both? Marcus256 (talk) 13:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The contents, its why I supported the AFD! Its a good article, just it doesn't pass any GNG, Github, twitter users and videos are not independent coverage. You are a giant COI and should have noted this. You are clearly not a new editor to Wikipedia, which is why I am so concerned. Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 16:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/MRISC32&oldid=1127637245"