ELOG

Wikipedia has been an unreliable source for a very long time, just for the reasons that we are seeing here now with psi and Elog. Those that 'run' Wikipedia are political and authoratative. I have not only had these negative experiences with 'them' but know of many others that have as well. I see no reason why an organization as ours with such great ideas, programs and people need to be on their site. I think it would 'say more' if we left this as is and let others see how unreliable Wikipedia really is.

John

Andreas Luedeke wrote:

It appears to me that this is a really stupid problem: the article provides many links to sources, but they are just links, not "references". That does not count, since links could be something else than references.

I'll try to edit it and transform the list of external links into references to verify the text. Lets hope that this will suffice.

Okay: found three articles about applications of ELOG and put them under references. I took the liberty to submit the draft: it shows that they expect some month delay for a review. I have no idea if that was what they want, but it is worth a try.

Edmund Blomley wrote:

If I understand it correctly I think it has to be submitted for review with the blue button on that page, just not sure if that should come from your side or someone else

Stefan Ritt wrote:

I added some more references, that's about all I can do. Not sure if that is enough.

Stefan

Edmund Blomley wrote:

It was now moved to the Draft space (which I did not even now existed so far): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:ELOG

Sebastian Schenk wrote:

I have requested an undeletion of the article. The article was deleted "PROD", which means that someone tagged it. And if noone removes the tag, it could be deleted.

I could revive the article. So in the future, One should have an eye on it and maybe update the current version of the software.

If there iy an paper on the elog, maybe it could be cited for more creditability.

Andreas Luedeke wrote:

It looks to me like only an author of an article can contradict a deletion. I did not find a single method to even comment on the deletion.
I am not an Wikipedia expert, can anyone suggest on how to push for the article to be restored? Or do we just write it again, until people stop deleting it?

Stefan Ritt wrote:

I agree. I ahead ;-) I think it is not a good idea if the ELOG author pushes on that, but better someone else.

Best,
Stefan

Sebastian Schenk wrote:

Hello,

I noticed the wikipedia article of the ELOG got deleted in November 2021.
With the reason: "Poorly sourced article, and I was not able to find good sources myself."

I could access the old article through web.archive.org, but for the project it would be good, if the article got revived.

ELOG V3.1.5-fe60aaf