Talk:GraphBLAS

General suggestions

Hi ScottKolo. I'm not an AfC reviewer and don't really know much about the subject of this draft so I cannot really comment on whether it's something which is Wikipedia notable for an article to be written about; if you'd like specific feedback about that type of thing, you might try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics for feedback.

I do, however, have a bit of experience cleaning up article formatting and other things and there are some things I noticed about the draft that you should probably take care of. If this was already in the article namespace, I would go ahead and do so myself, but I figured I just point them out here since it's still only a draft. I did clean up a few of these things just as an example for reference.

1. Please use sentence-case capitalization for section headings per MOS:SECTIONCAPS
2. Please don't add line breaks between bullet list entries per WP:LISTGAP. The displayed list might look OK, but the software will treat each new entry as a separate list which could cause problems with how some devices (e.g. screen readers) "read" the list, etc. It also can mess up the formatting of multi-level bullet point lists.
3. Please don't embed external links into the bodies of articles per WP:CS#Avoid embedded links, WP:ELLIST and WP:EL#cite_note-7. If you mention something by name and a Wikipedia article about it already exists, use a WP:WIKILINK. If no article about it exists, you can either create one, add a red link or simply just mention it by name without any links. Adding links to external websites like this (syntax [http://www.example.com this]) to the bodies of articles can quickly run afoul of WP:LINKFARM, WP:NOTDIRECTORY, and even WP:SPAM; so, it's best to avoid altogether. If you want to add the links as a citation to a reliable source to aid in the verification of certain article content, then you should format the citations as an inline citation (not an embedded citation). If you want to add links as an external link per WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE, then add them to the "External links" section as explained in WP:ELCITE; in this case, though, you should avoid adding anything that falls under WP:ELNO.
4. Please remember that you're writing in Wikipedia's voice and some reader's might not be very familiar with the subject matter; so, keep things like WP:JARGON and WP:TONE in mind; also, please remember that pretty much every statement (no matter how obvious it may seem to you or a mathematicians) is going to need to be supported by a citation to a reliable source per WP:BURDEN. So, you're going to need sources for the "Implementation and uses" section, so that it doesn't get mistaken for WP:NOR. In addition, most editors will leave a draft be as a courtesy to the creator unless there are some serious policy/guideline issues which need addressing, but articles are there for anyone to edit and anytime from anywhere around the world without worrying about any such concerns. So, if this draft is approved and becomes an article, you will have no final editorial control over it's content as explained in WP:OWN and even WP:EXPERT.

FWIW, neither of the things I mentioned above should affect whether the draft is ultimately approved via AFC; they are just things which aren't really in accordance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style and some other guidelines. Good luck with the draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:38, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Also, I think the use of external links in the implementations section may be inappropriate. See WP:EL. It is probably better to rewrite the section into prose, only mentioning the most notable uses (using secondary sources, preferably). Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 08:17, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Marchjuly and Darylgolden, Thank you both so much for your help and suggestions! I'm rewriting/fixing the issues you've raised, especially the external link issue. --ScottKolo (talk) 14:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)