![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
I fail to see where there is a lack of objectivity. The article is entirely factual, as can easily be verified by any of the following means:
1/ loot at the website 2/ read the supplied user guide. 3/ look at either the github or sourceforge entries 4/ look at the user email list
Most of these multiply cross reference.
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Abrolag (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with Abrolag's argument. I have checked the article and, as a longstanding Yoshimi users, all information seems factual and verifiable.
- It is very common for smaller Free Software project with a relatively small contributor and user-base that people somehow involved in the project have best (factual) knowledge.
- Furthermore this article is about (Free) Software and the information provided is technical / factual, so it's not clear where there is lack of neutrality when comparing to the the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view article.
- The box also links to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest insinuating that the main contributor might have a potential conflict of interest. This seems unfair in this case, without factual evidence, because whilst they are a major contributor to the project, as said above Yoshimi is Free Software meaning that any contributor (major or minor):
- a) is an individual and not a company/organization who does not have any financial gain from the project nor factually describing the software on Wikipedia
- b) works on the project in their free time as a volunteer (just like many Wikipedans who are volunteers)
- c) has cited many factual sources to support what is written in the article
- It would be helpful if the proponent of the COI and CN warnings went in a little more detail as to which specific improvements / edits would, from their point of view, improve the situation in such regards.
- Finally, given the very 'small' nature of the Yoshimi Software project, I'd warn about the fact that in this case adding a COI as it is shown on the page - possibly in good faith - overlooked the 'Avoid Outing' principle described in the main COI article[[1]] Lorenzosu (talk) 08:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)