Talk:Llama.cpp

notability
In line with the general notability guidelines and the recommendation in 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)