Jump to content

Talk:SoftWare Hash IDentifier

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Re: COI

[edit]

@AbcSxyZ what conflict of interest do you have regarding this article? If you're declaring a conflict of interest you need to say why. Do you work for Software Heritage or something? Mrfoogles (talk) 18:08, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My relations to the topic are the following:
- I don't work for Software Heritage at the moment, but I had a job interview these last days. So maybe (with some luck ?), I may work at their foundation near September.
- In overall, I'm interested in topics related to open models (open science, open education, open software & cie), particularly education on it. Trying to work around it, but still being out of any organisation/paid activity, kind of citizen things, popular education/citizen research.
By doing things related to openness, Wikipedia is never that far, but a first contribution of that kind for me (more around the comma edit level usually).
In fact, following my interview I was exploring information about the organisation. I found about these SWHID identifiers, who were just recently standardized as ISO. As it may of an importance similar to DOI with a standard going slowly beyond Software Heritage, I thought it may be a great addition.
I hope it was done relatively appropriately, I'm not totally sure about what I should disclaim and where, but I suppose the topic can be sufficiently relevant for the encyclopedia.
Hope it clarifies any eventual conflict of interest. AbcSxyZ (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And related to rejection for being based on documentation, still technical topic without any press coverage I can find. Nor in research journals sadly, some materials but not sure of the relevance.
I've some idea but far from specialist with Wikipedia and reference policy, even more at this border between technical and press information. In the french version, a reviewer accepted it with this level of information : https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_Hash_Identifier
Does every article need to rely on newspaper at some points ? What about specialized blogs for example ? With what kind of information and at which degree of maturity this type of topic would be included ? And as it's slowly being used (beyond software heritage), would be great to know.
Curious case to follow and learn about in any ways. AbcSxyZ (talk) 19:35, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[EDIT] Move list of sources to a new talk section AbcSxyZ (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Search of Sources for article creation

[edit]

As the draft was rejected due to being « only sourced to documentation pages », I will try to gather some resources to enable a more extensive coverage of SWHID.

Need to figure out what may be relevant for the article as it's hard to find articles from both research journals and more traditional newspaper.

Research papers about SWHID would be fine - better than news media. Boud (talk) 13:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Short lead

[edit]

@AbcSxyZ: I recommend keeping to a short WP:LEAD. The article is very short - the lead should be in proportion to (much smaller than) the content. It can be expanded later if the content gets big enough. Boud (talk) 13:55, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata property; possible future proposal of a Wikipedia template

[edit]

There's a Wikidata property Software Hash ID (P6138), but I don't think it necessarily makes sense to refer to it here. At least it will be on this talk page to help people find it. Sooner or later someone could propose template:SWHID as a Wikipedia template, so that in Wikipedia articles that refer to a specific version of software (not very often, but in some topics this is relevant - e.g. on the Jia Tan and xz), this would be available. Boud (talk) 16:48, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sources needed for specific SWHIDs of 'official' Apollo 11 + NCSA Mosaic

[edit]

I see a long list of NCSA Mosaic forks and there are a lot of SWHID'd things with the string 'apollo'. In any case, a source that states that a specific SWHID'd artefact is to in some sense 'official' would ideally be needed before quoting a specific SWHID for one or the other. It's not up to Wikipedians to arbitrarily guess. Boud (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: shift to main space

[edit]

@Mrfoogles: I think that this article would survive an AfD once shifted to main space. The SWHID is considered significant by the French National Centre for Scientific Research, by UNESCO, and has a secret (unless you pay) specification by the International Organization for Standardization. The secrecy of ISO specifications is ridiculous in the XXIst century, but not the topic here. ISO doesn't agree on specifications lightly. Though it's true that an ISO standard in itself does not guarantee Wikipedia notability; SWHID is somewhere in between ISO 18666:2015 Traditional Chinese medicine – General requirements of moxibustion devices and ISO 18682:2016 Intelligent transport systems – External hazard detection and notification systems – Basic requirements...

The article itself is still a bit stubby, but notability seems uncontroversial and the quality seems reasonable enough for further editing in mainspace to make it a bit more complete. Per WP:AFCPURPOSE, the article seems ready to shift.

Any objections to shifting it to mainspace? Boud (talk) 17:38, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I wouldn't mind if you did if you think it's notable. Did a little googling but not that much. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome ! Thanks @Boud for your contributions and involvement in this page creation. Even if it's not the most exhaustive article, it's starting to look nice! Glad to see this result 🙃
Now the French version will need a little updating, but it won't be for today! AbcSxyZ (talk) 17:54, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SoftWare_Hash_IDentifier&oldid=1292384954"