This article assesses the maturity of the e-government (e-gov) field by examining the nature of 170 papers published at three major e-gov conferences using a straightforward maturity model. Papers were examined mainly for rigor but, to some extent, also for relevance. It was found that theory generation and theory testing are not frequent, while case stories (no theory, no structured data collection) and product descriptions (no analysis or test) are. Also, claims beyond what is reasonable, given the method used, are frequent. As for relevance, only a few of the cases where theories are either tested or generated concern the role and nature of government and governance; most concern general organizational issues that could well find a place within traditional IS conferences. On the positive side, involvement of various pertinent disciplines appears relevant, and global outreach goes far beyond the Atlantic shores. It is concluded that e-gov conferences need to address quality criteria, both rigor- and relevance-oriented, if e-gov is to develop into a mature research field.