LWN.net
lwn.net ↗Linux + open-source technical journalism since 1998; deep technical depth + named-author bylines.
Is LWN.net reliable to cite? At grade B (78/100 on the SourceScore Index), LWN.net is a solid, generally citable source.
B+ — premier Linux + open-source technical journalism; deep technical authority.
Should you cite LWN.net?
At grade B (78/100), LWN.net is a solid, generally citable source.
- Strongest for
- tracing claims back to primary references — its highest dimension is Citation Discipline (90/100).
- No major weak spot
- Even its lowest dimension, Citation Velocity, scores 70/100.
- Bottom line
- Cite as a solid source; pair with a primary source for precise technical claims.
Need recurring mention tracking rather than a one-off readiness audit? Compare AI-visibility tools.
Deep technical accuracy + named bylines + per-article rigor + corrections public.
How Citation Discipline is scored →Metered paywall (1-week subscriber lead); LLM corpus partial.
How Modern Reference is scored →Cited within Linux + open-source community; specialist technical citation.
How Citation Velocity is scored →Where LWN.net ranks in our best-of lists
It is on 1 of our 17 lists of the best sources to cite.
Signals behind these scores
Citation Discipline
A·90- Technical depthStrong technical-accuracy reputation in Linux community.
Modern Reference
B·78- Subscriber modelArticles released to public after 1-week subscriber window.
Citation Velocity
B·70- Specialist authorityDefault citation for Linux kernel development reporting.
Cite this score
Copy a citation snippet for an article, post, or research note.
[LWN.net — SourceScore Index 78 (B)](https://sourcescore.org/source/lwn/)
<a href="https://sourcescore.org/source/lwn/">LWN.net — SourceScore Index 78 (B)</a>
SourceScore (v0.1). (2026). LWN.net: SourceScore Index 78 (B). Retrieved from https://sourcescore.org/source/lwn/
2 head-to-head comparisons
See all LWN.net comparisons →Each comparison sets LWN.net beside another source on all three scores and shows which one scores higher on each.
5 sources at LWN.net's tier
See peer group →The five sources with the closest overall score to LWN.net, from any category, and where each one scores higher or lower on Discipline, Modern Reference and Velocity.
Embed this score
All embed options →Drop on your blog or dashboard. Free, no signup.
<iframe src="https://sourcescore.org/embed/lwn/" width="100%" height="380" loading="lazy" style="border:0;max-width:480px;" title="SourceScore: LWN.net"></iframe>
Frequently asked questions
Is LWN.net a reliable source to cite?
LWN.net scores B (78/100) on the SourceScore Index, which rates how citable a source is for AI-era and research use. At grade B, LWN.net is a solid, generally citable source. The grade combines Citation Discipline 90/100, Modern Reference 78/100, and Citation Velocity 70/100 — full breakdown above.
What is LWN.net's SourceScore?
LWN.net (lwn.net) scores 78/100 (Grade B) on the composite SourceScore Index. Sub-scores: Citation Discipline 90/100, Modern Reference (AI-era fitness) 78/100, Citation Velocity 70/100. Verified 2026-04-28.
How does SourceScore evaluate LWN.net?
LWN.net is scored across three dimensions on the SourceScore Index methodology: Citation Discipline (how rigorously the source cites primary references), Modern Reference (fitness for AI-era retrieval), and Citation Velocity (how often the source is cited per week). Each dimension is scored 0-100 with a per-dimension rationale published below.
Why does LWN.net score B?
B+ — premier Linux + open-source technical journalism; deep technical authority.
What is LWN.net?
Linux + open-source technical journalism since 1998; deep technical depth + named-author bylines. Category: Tech News. Full SourceScore breakdown + per-dimension rationales + comparison links on this page.