Draft talk:Tus (protocol)

Sources and help with the restored draft

I am Kevin van Zonneveld, affiliated with Transloadit and tus, as disclosed in the restoration request. The draft was restored on 19 September after deletion for inactivity. I would like help addressing the earlier sourcing and promotional-tone concerns before resubmitting it.

Could an uninvolved editor assess these two reports and advise whether they provide sufficient independent coverage for an article?

• Olaf van Miltenburg, “Vimeo gaat 'resumable upload'-protocol van Nederlandse start-up gebruiken”, Tweakers, 20 February 2015 (Dutch).
• Jonathan Keane, “Berlin-based Transloadit wants to fix broken file uploads once and for all, with support from Vimeo”, Tech.eu, 16 November 2015.

For transparency, I was interviewed and proofread the articles; neither was paid coverage. Tweakers is not cited in the restored draft.

Two further publications describe applications of tus:

• Wang et al., “Building a Science Gateway For Processing and Modeling Sequencing Data Via Apache Airavata”, PEARC 2018, section 3.2.
• Fallaw et al., “Institutional Data Repository Development, a Moving Target”, Code4Lib Journal, issue 51, 14 June 2021, “Cloud Solutions”.

These last two are reports of the authors’ own implementations. Help revising the draft into a shorter, neutral article would also be welcome.

This request and source list were prepared with AI assistance. Kevinvz (talk) 08:28, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

This looks like sufficient coverage to me and I haven't reviewed the citations in the article itself.

I suggest you significantly shorten the article to address the the complaints about tone and promotion. ~Kvng (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2026 (UTC)