503:
FOSS language, has many search hits and is notable, Mayan EDMS is FOSS web app done in Python but doesn't has that many search hits, conclusion - Mayan EDMS is not notable), mentioned an entry in
Freecode of little more than a year ago as a negative argument of notability (what is the expect amount of years an entry in Freecode must age before being considered valid evidence in favor of notability?), you confused heterogeneous software and software types: "as do searches for other open source document management systems like Alfresco or Magnolia" like I explained in the previous entry, Alfresco and Magnolia are completely different kinds of software and saying they are both document management systems is like saying MS SQL server and MS Powerpoint are both database managers, you confused the purpose and meaning of what a CMS is and what a DMS is, you are applying commercial enterprise software notability criteria to a Free Open Source project, the commercial enterprise software notability criteria in itself is not reliable, consistent or properly defined and accepted (Computerworld, InfoWorld, CMSWire and a directory of enterprise open source software), you assumed that LogicalDoc and Alfresco are Free Open Source software when they are not, they are commercial software and stretching the definition they can be said to be Open Source too, but never Free Open Source therefore their notability is in now way indicative of the notability of other DMS software like Mayan EDMS. In regard on your comment about myself, I have no problem 'researching and documenting' sources, but I have to no wish either to spend time 'defending' the notability of a real addition to the pool of information that Knowledge is with counterparts that do not have a full grasp of the knowledge required for such debate, and comments like "If Mayan EDMS is so staggeringly popular among government agencies around" do not really help demonstrate the seriousness you imply you apply to the argumentative process. You have shown a general lack of knowledge about the DMS software type and industry but are still willing to debate the issue without said knowledge, this is what I was referring to with the phrase "this is what's in store for new users like myself from established but uninformed editors", you seems to imply I do not want to "spend more time researching and documenting with reliable sources their assertions than it takes to type up those assertions, that's kind of a thing with encyclopedias." you seem to lack the same thing you are commenting about myself. --
466:(what Alfresco is) a backend, low visibility (to users) document repository software, a market dominate by commercial enterprise players where Free Open Source (or even Open Source) alternatives are shunned and have very little chance of exposition, that's why you are not able to find mentions of Mayan EDMS or any other true Free Open Source DMS like it in commercial circulations or commercially sponsored web sites. As the recently added references to the article show, Mayan EDMS is quite popular around the world and with government agencies, that it doesn't show up in commercially driven publications or websites is no surprise and in now way indicative of its notability or assumed lack of it. The purpose of the Knowledge article is not to help it's notability as it is already quite well known, a quick Google search for: 'Mayan EDMS' or 'Django based DMS' can serve to prove this point. Deleting this article would only serve to affect Knowledge visitors looking for information on non commercial, free open source DMS software. In regards to the account, this is my first ever Knowledge account and Mayan EDMS is my first ever article, which is why it may look to you as though this is a single purpose account. I created it two days ago and have spent more time defending my first article than the time it took to be created... Whether Mayan EDMS' article gets deleted or not I don't think I would write or contribute to another Knowledge article seeing that this is what's in store for new users like myself from established but uninformed editors. --
485:
governmental IT magazines and journals, which exist in spades, and won't have to rely on things like these blog links and Google+ links that were recently added for future articles on this product, which will doubtlessly soon be as omnipresent as sliced bread. (In seriousness, if the product fulfills all of the promises made, it will be successful and will become mainstream and this will all be moot in the future.) And yes, someone who wants to create articles on
Knowledge should expect to spend more time researching and documenting with reliable sources their assertions than it takes to type up those assertions, that's kind of a thing with encyclopedias. Once you get into the significance of a work coming from it being ideologically "pure" and "true", I'm sorry but you are beyond the pale of what Knowledge is for. --
859:(maybe with a deputy sheriff's badge, since there are a handful of responsibilities that accompany it.) "Mayan EDMS is super-virtuous in a technical sense and should be advertised" just isn't a valid argument for this community and this project. It sounds like you would get the best bang for your buck by spending effort and money to encourage publications that fit Knowledge's definition of reliable, independent sources to review and report on Mayan EDMS, then you get both greater public awareness and a better basis for a Knowledge article. But if you're lucky, maybe someone else on that mailing list knows of existing sources that would be notability-establishing... if it wasn't part of the email to request that people search for them, make sure everyone knows. --
334:. The notability standards for commercial software do not apply to free open source software. Mayan EDMS is the main DMS in use in the permits and regulations agency in the government of Puerto Rico aside from being used worldwide as proof by it's worldwide network of 3rd support providers. Article has been updated to include this last two references in support for notability. If getting an article on CMSWire.com is so easy, then it should not be taken into account to rate notability, getting software supported worldwide by commercial entities as well as being used in the public sector should have much more weight. --
774:
sources that conform to the general
Knowledge guidelines and show how Mayan EDMS falls on the "notable" side, rather than just expressing contempt for the stab I have taken at it, you will probably convince both me and others. Honestly that is a steep mountain to climb even for someone already familiar with Knowledge policies and guidelines, so really the simplest thing to do is probably to just be patient as valid sources should soon appear if Mayan EDMS is as outstanding as claimed. But by the way, making threats as the IP address above is doing is one of the most certain ways to
799:
to find out about it by removing the entry from
Knowledge. If you're so enthusiastic about keeping Knowledge 'clean', I'm sure you could find much better targets than attacking legitimate and even rare open-source projects providing real value for its customers for free. Otoh, I'm too unimportant that I'd dare to say that my 'threat' has any value...just wanting to express that I do support Knowledge finding its value by being open, but, otoh, seeing deleting articles about open-source projects based on
662:, this shouldn't be done until the deletion discussion is concluded) so that you can continue working on a draft of it and add references to the text as Mayan EDMS becomes more mainstream, so that the material is still accessible to you if the existing article is deleted. This way, once there is enough evidence to establish notability under Knowledge policies and guidelines, it can be copied back into the main article
593:
arguments based upon my own understanding of
Knowledge policies, guidelines, and community practices. I'm pretty sure, if I understand the procedure properly, it's going to be some uninvolved user with the admin flag who will eventually read the arguments and evidence presented here and in the article and make a decision and take actions. --
556:
article. If waiting until coverage in government IT publications is available and incorporating links to it into the text you've written is too much to ask, the small amount of effort you're willing to go to in making "real additions" to
Knowledge is probably not as valuable as you imagine it to be. --
52:. I am not taking into consideration the two "keep" opinions: that of Siloraptor, who maintains that the software's alleged popularity amounts to notability even in the absence of third-party coverage, which is at odds with our guidelines, and that of 93.139.135.238 for what I hope are obvious reasons.
858:
You are as significant as any other editor, you just have to follow the same rules as everyone else and make arguments based on the same policies and guidelines. Even having the admin flag on an account does not make a user some kind of authority, it's basically just the equivalent of a gun license
798:
get what you want" assumption is completely wrong. I use Mayan EDMS, find it's terrific and was pissed after discovering on Mayan EDMS mailing list that the article is going to be deleted...no more, no less. So we are already happy using the free product, but you want to prevent new potential users
484:
I have no wish to publicize personal IRL details about myself but I will say that I am by no means confused or uninformed about this field. If Mayan EDMS is so staggeringly popular among government agencies around the world then we will shortly have lots of mentions and articles in non-commercial
773:
unsuccessfully because it is difficult to formulate a standard that would conform to the basic principles of independent, reliable sourcing in the somewhat mercurial software world. If anyone can articulate a standard that would enable notable FOSS to be distinguished from non-notable FOSS using
502:
I was not asking you to divulge real life details, my previous argument stands on its own as presenting your erroneous conclusions: You confused Open Source with Free Open Source or Free software, you aggregated the search results of heterogeneous terms as proof of lack of notability (Python is a
369:. If Mayan EDMS is having difficulty getting this kind of recognition from the IT and open source communities, Knowledge is not the place to start or cultivate such recognition. If LogicalDOC has the same notability problems its article should be deleted too. Note to other editors: Siloraptor
592:
You may misunderstand the situation a little bit: I am a more established user in that I've been working on
Knowledge longer but I do not have the admin flag on my account and I am unable to do anything to your account or the article other than evaluate the claims made and comment and advance
555:
Funny how you seem to have a perfectly acceptable amount of information to evaluate me and my level of knowledge while the a few sentences you can see which I've written make me too ignorant to evaluate the software in question using all the information that has been presented here and in the
327:
420:
It would certainly give me more cause to investigate thoroughly than anything that has turned up in defense of Mayan EDMS. I haven't taken a close look at these Bossie awards to see what significance they have, so I wouldn't offhand be ready to say that it's notability-establishing.
620:
It seems pretty easy to get a press release in CMSWorld. The one for LD is, indeed, a press release from a commercial interest. Mind you, press releases don't connote notability - but that Bossie seems to reel it in for LD. Also, Siloraptor, I direct you to
734:
non-bloated open-source EDMS and it's hard to believe why you want to remove this entry. Otoh, I'm sure if such articles are going to be removed, we'll think twice by the end of the year whether to extend our financial support to
Knowledge.
533:. If Mayan is all that, then don't waste your time arguing as to why it should be considered notable with a lack of evidence to support it, spend your time digging up why it's notable and bring it to us in the form we need. --
573:
I'm posting this line so that my silence may not be confused with disrespect, but I have no desire to continue working on the article or it's defense and submit it and my user account to any action you deem appropriate.
272:
entry for it was created little more than a year ago, and there aren't even enough people looking for information about it to register on Google Trends. Does not satisfy any notability criteria at this time,
167:
462:(what Magnolia is) a front end piece of software to publish content and manage websites hence very visible and where Open Source alternative are quite popular (Mambo, Joomla, Drupal, Mezzanine) and that of a
361:, the open source technologies that Mayan EDMS is based upon, turn up dozens of hits across Infoworld, Computerworld, and CMSWire.com, as do searches for other open source document management systems like
352:
It may have been true ten or fifteen years ago that "commercial publications pay little or no attention to non-commercial/pure free open source software" but that is completely untrue today. Searches for
770:
759:: To add to what I have said above in case it isn't understood, there is no Knowledge guideline addressing the approach for assessing the notability of software, commercial
161:
223:
122:
803:
valid reason my change my attitude to put my $ s to some other open-source projects...fortunately there are many and Mayan EDMS is one of them. ;)
709:
Do as you must, I have no desire to continue defending this article and withhold any opposition or arguments to any action you deem appropriate. --
521:
Look, Siloraptor, to be blunt, arguing the merits of the article as it exists is not likely to help you. You need to prove to us why it is
127:
902:
810:
742:
895:
Software is very notable just do a search for Mayan EDMS in the news, it appears in the front page of mayor software news outlets
849:
700:
638:
546:
407:
370:
211:
261:
767:
764:
17:
667:
95:
90:
447:
439:
354:
99:
182:
860:
779:
671:
594:
557:
486:
443:
422:
378:
278:
149:
82:
622:
463:
318:
and it's article (which is the basis for the one about Mayan EDMS), suffers from the same lack of recognition from
886:
459:
40:
829:
906:
814:
746:
323:
828:
How insignificant you see yourself in the grand scheme of things does not enter the picture. Quite simply,
143:
331:
659:
451:
882:
625:- the existence of one article, in and of itself, does not justify the existence of another article. --
314:: Commercial publications pay little or no attention to non-commercial/pure free open source software.
36:
139:
910:
867:
853:
818:
786:
750:
718:
704:
678:
642:
601:
583:
564:
550:
512:
493:
475:
429:
411:
385:
343:
306:
285:
239:
215:
64:
898:
845:
806:
738:
714:
710:
696:
634:
579:
575:
542:
508:
504:
471:
467:
403:
339:
335:
207:
86:
663:
362:
175:
189:
655:
455:
78:
70:
833:
227:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
881:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
319:
438:
You seem to be confusing and aggregating the popularity, purpose and market penetration of
837:
688:
626:
534:
395:
274:
199:
268:(which is usually even willing to publish press releases with little modification), the
155:
366:
302:
55:
374:
253:
526:
116:
530:
522:
458:
a DMS web app. You also seems to be confusing the purpose and exposition of a
315:
687:
As the creator of this discussion, I am not opposed to this as a solution. --
298:
257:
654:
An additional recommendation - Siloraptor, we should copy the article to a
269:
358:
875:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
394:
LogicalDOC got a Bossie from
Infoworld in 2010. Seems legit? --
328:
InfoWorld: 1 marginal mention in an open source awards article
332:
Enterprise Open Source
Directory: 0 votes and only 82 views
265:
112:
108:
104:
174:
440:Open Source software vs. Free Open Source software
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
889:). No further edits should be made to this page.
198:This software does not appear to be notable. --
730:Do as you are told to do...Mayan EDMS is the
224:list of Software-related deletion discussions
188:
8:
222:Note: This debate has been included in the
221:
658:under your account (though note that
7:
836:. Thank you for understanding. --
830:we are not a promotional mechanism
24:
668:declare any conflict of interest
324:ComputerWorld: no search results
262:Enterprise Open Source Directory
529:, in such a way that it can be
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
911:23:15, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
1:
320:Freecode: 1 month old entry
297:: No significant coverage.
927:
670:you have if necessary. --
260:sites, no listing at the
878:Please do not modify it.
868:23:20, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
854:15:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
819:15:14, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
787:06:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
751:06:11, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
719:17:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
705:15:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
679:05:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
643:03:03, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
602:06:18, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
584:04:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
565:03:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
551:00:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
513:17:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
494:05:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
476:04:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
430:03:56, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
412:03:01, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
386:23:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
344:22:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
307:20:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
286:09:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
240:08:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
216:06:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
65:06:15, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
454:a Python framework and
794:. Let me say that "to
778:get what you want. --
652:Userfy for Siloraptor
666:. Also, you should
832:. Please also see
623:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
48:The result was
901:comment added by
809:comment added by
741:comment added by
242:
63:
918:
913:
880:
841:
840:Dennis The Tiger
821:
753:
692:
691:Dennis The Tiger
630:
629:Dennis The Tiger
538:
537:Dennis The Tiger
527:reliable sources
399:
398:Dennis The Tiger
236:
233:
230:
203:
202:Dennis The Tiger
193:
192:
178:
130:
120:
102:
62:
60:
53:
34:
926:
925:
921:
920:
919:
917:
916:
915:
896:
893:
887:deletion review
876:
839:
804:
736:
690:
628:
536:
397:
252:No hits on the
234:
231:
228:
201:
135:
126:
93:
77:
74:
56:
54:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
924:
922:
903:64.237.192.193
892:
891:
872:
871:
870:
856:
823:
822:
811:93.139.135.238
789:
763:open source.
754:
743:93.139.135.238
724:
723:
722:
721:
707:
682:
681:
660:per convention
648:
647:
646:
645:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
607:
606:
605:
604:
587:
586:
568:
567:
553:
516:
515:
497:
496:
479:
478:
450:the language,
435:
434:
433:
432:
415:
414:
389:
388:
347:
346:
309:
291:
290:
289:
288:
244:
243:
196:
195:
132:
73:
68:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
923:
914:
912:
908:
904:
900:
890:
888:
884:
879:
873:
869:
866:
864:
857:
855:
851:
847:
843:
842:
835:
831:
827:
826:
825:
824:
820:
816:
812:
808:
802:
797:
793:
790:
788:
785:
783:
777:
772:
769:
766:
762:
758:
755:
752:
748:
744:
740:
733:
729:
726:
725:
720:
716:
712:
708:
706:
702:
698:
694:
693:
686:
685:
684:
683:
680:
677:
675:
669:
665:
661:
657:
653:
650:
649:
644:
640:
636:
632:
631:
624:
619:
618:
603:
600:
598:
591:
590:
589:
588:
585:
581:
577:
572:
571:
570:
569:
566:
563:
561:
554:
552:
548:
544:
540:
539:
532:
528:
524:
520:
519:
518:
517:
514:
510:
506:
501:
500:
499:
498:
495:
492:
490:
483:
482:
481:
480:
477:
473:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
449:
445:
441:
437:
436:
431:
428:
426:
419:
418:
417:
416:
413:
409:
405:
401:
400:
393:
392:
391:
390:
387:
384:
382:
376:
372:
371:appears to be
368:
364:
360:
356:
351:
350:
349:
348:
345:
341:
337:
333:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
310:
308:
304:
300:
296:
293:
292:
287:
284:
282:
276:
271:
267:
264:, no hits on
263:
259:
255:
254:Computerworld
251:
248:
247:
246:
245:
241:
237:
225:
220:
219:
218:
217:
213:
209:
205:
204:
191:
187:
184:
181:
177:
173:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
141:
138:
137:Find sources:
133:
129:
124:
118:
114:
110:
106:
101:
97:
92:
88:
84:
80:
76:
75:
72:
69:
67:
66:
61:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
897:— Preceding
894:
877:
874:
865:andersnatch❩
862:
861:❨Ṩtruthious
838:
805:— Preceding
800:
795:
791:
784:andersnatch❩
781:
780:❨Ṩtruthious
775:
760:
756:
737:— Preceding
731:
727:
689:
676:andersnatch❩
673:
672:❨Ṩtruthious
651:
627:
599:andersnatch❩
596:
595:❨Ṩtruthious
562:andersnatch❩
559:
558:❨Ṩtruthious
535:
491:andersnatch❩
488:
487:❨Ṩtruthious
427:andersnatch❩
424:
423:❨Ṩtruthious
396:
383:andersnatch❩
380:
379:❨Ṩtruthious
311:
294:
283:andersnatch❩
280:
279:❨Ṩtruthious
249:
200:
197:
185:
179:
171:
164:
158:
152:
146:
136:
57:
49:
47:
31:
28:
444:FOSS vs OSS
266:CMSWire.com
162:free images
834:WP:VALINFO
711:Siloraptor
576:Siloraptor
505:Siloraptor
468:Siloraptor
456:Mayan EDMS
336:Siloraptor
316:LogicalDOC
79:Mayan edms
71:Mayan edms
58:Sandstein
883:talk page
768:have been
664:namespace
656:user page
258:InfoWorld
37:talk page
899:unsigned
885:or in a
807:unsigned
765:Attempts
739:unsigned
531:verified
367:Magnolia
363:Alfresco
275:WP:USUAL
270:Freecode
123:View log
39:or in a
792:Comment
757:Comment
525:, with
523:notable
168:WP refs
156:scholar
96:protect
91:history
452:Django
448:Python
359:Django
355:Python
295:Delete
250:Delete
235:JAMMMY
140:Google
100:delete
50:delete
850:stuff
701:stuff
639:stuff
547:stuff
408:stuff
226:. ★☆
212:stuff
183:JSTOR
144:books
128:Stats
117:views
109:watch
105:links
16:<
907:talk
848:and
846:Rawr
815:talk
771:made
747:talk
732:only
728:keep
715:talk
699:and
697:Rawr
637:and
635:Rawr
580:talk
545:and
543:Rawr
509:talk
472:talk
406:and
404:Rawr
377:. --
357:and
340:talk
312:Keep
303:talk
299:SL93
277:. --
229:DUCK
210:and
208:Rawr
176:FENS
150:news
113:logs
87:talk
83:edit
796:not
776:not
464:DMS
460:CMS
446:),
375:SPA
373:an
365:or
256:or
238:☆★
190:TWL
125:•
121:– (
909:)
852:)
817:)
801:no
761:or
749:)
717:)
703:)
641:)
582:)
574:--
549:)
511:)
474:)
421:--
410:)
342:)
330:,
326:,
322:,
305:)
232:IS
214:)
170:)
115:|
111:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
905:(
863:ℬ
844:(
813:(
782:ℬ
745:(
713:(
695:(
674:ℬ
633:(
597:ℬ
578:(
560:ℬ
541:(
507:(
489:ℬ
470:(
442:(
425:ℬ
402:(
381:ℬ
338:(
301:(
281:ℬ
206:(
194:)
186:·
180:·
172:·
165:·
159:·
153:·
147:·
142:(
134:(
131:)
119:)
81:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.