Talk:Llama.cpp

Latest comment: 2 days ago by J2UDY7r00CRjH in topic Potential sources

notability

edit

In line with the general notability guidelines and the recommendation in Wikipedia:Multiple_sources that "it seems that challenges to notability are successfully rebuffed when there are three good in-depth references in reliable sources that are independent of each other" I have four sources that are mainly about llama.cpp that explain what the software is and how to use it. Two sources are from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources and one is from an academic journal (with one of the keywords listed in that paper being "llama.cpp"). If anyone disagrees with the notability of this software please describe why you think the sources listed do not show notability. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 23:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Potential sources

edit

Geganov and Slaren wrote an article about GGUF here: [1] I'm not sure if we can use it as it is a primary source. I personally would like to use it as a source for the Vulkan backend which other sources have not yet covered I think. Xuan Son Nguyen is the third author and works for Huggingface, so perhaps we can view him as an editor, which then makes it permissible to use? Might open a discussion on RSN about this.

There is also a great article about GGUF here: [2]

However, it is a bachelor's thesis, which means it probably cannot be used per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. If it gets more citations I think then we could use it. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 21:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)Reply