Talk:Invenio

The issues referred to in this page should be raised based on the following considerations:

- notability guidelines: it is true that Invenio was originally developed by CERN. Today (and since 2007), though, it is co-developed by an international collaboration comprising institutes such as CERN, DESY, EPFL, FNAL, SLAC (see the Website in the box in the Invenio page, or the readme file in the various versions). Actually there is no article on the "international collaboration", so the notability guidelines are met and the issue should be raised. Of course there are articles about CERN and DESY, EPFL, etc. But also for DSpace ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSpace ) there are articles for MIT and HP Labs and even, more importantly, for Duraspace (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duraspace ). Invenio should be treated on an equality basis compared to DSpace. If it is not agreed and there are still doubts that the Invenio page does not meet the notability guidelines, please explain on which grounds and possibly hint how to meet them.

- references to primary sources: it seems that this issue does not take into consideration the first of the External links. This link points to a list of a couple of dozens websites, indipendent from the "international collaboration" co-developing Invenio, which should be considered as secondary sources. Isn't it enough to raise this issue? If it is not the case, would it help to include references to an indipendent survey such as http://www.toscaconsultants.fr/logiciel.htm, which was reported also in the specialised press, see: http://www.toscaconsultants.fr/articles/logiciels_pour_bibliotheques_2014.pdf and http://www.toscaconsultants.fr/articles/bibliotheques_rebond_du_marche_des_logiciels.pdf ? There are also other indipendent sources that refer to Invenio. If they should be listed as "External links", I will be happy to add them, please let me know.

- Self-published sources: this issue should be raised based on the same grounds as the previous issue: the first of the External links lists several non "Self-published" sources. The mentioned survey is also a non "Self-published" source and other can be provided, if needed. Fcosta23 (talk) 12:24, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this... add the external and independent sources would be extremely helpful. I feel that notability guidelines are met to the extent that the claims made are rather grand, and lot of people will perhaps wonder if the spin-offs are viable. As you say, this article looks self-published, but now they have put it up, a critical eye can be focussed on the claims. Shirazibustan (talk) 11:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

What is this??
In searching for some kind of explanation of Invenio, it is quite unclear from their own website what they are about and what their relationship is to Zenodo. The Invenio site looks more like a sale pitch than anything else, and there are losts of claims made, such as "research data repository Zenodo at CERN is basically run under Invenio v3." Is it? That looks like an assertion, with no footnote. And what, for example, is the relationship to Invenio Business Solutions, for which we have a WIKI entry. The latter is a private company. Then we read: "The service provider TIND Technologies, an official CERN spin-off based in Norway, offers Invenio via a software-as-a-service model." The footnote is helpful and the link does go to a newsletter. But TIND is not explained, their site here: https://www.tind.io/. At the end of the day, it's a little unclear how these spin-offs work. InvenioRDM is basically a mirror of Zenodo, laid out the same way, with a few bell-and-whistles added. So why bother? Invenio does not indicate they are following FAIR principles, there is no section on governance, no board members named, no advisory council. What's going on? A wikipedia article might serve as a place of ojective reference. Shirazibustan (talk) 11:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)