Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Texvc

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Can't close this as a Merge because there is nothing to merge to. Consider renominating if someone finds a home for this info elsewhere, e.g. in Wikipedia space. EdJohnston (talk) 16:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Texvc

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This software plainly fails WP:GNG. There are now a fair number of books about MediaWiki, but this piece of innards isn't even mentioned in them [1]. Bad case of WP:SELF. Pcap ping 04:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 04:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 14:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to a LaTeX-specific site such as http://latex.wikia.com/ and consider whether coverage at MediaWiki and/or Help:Formula is appropriate. Ideally, put a redirect so as not to break links elsewhere (e.g. http://www.oxideinteractive.com.au/articles/practical-mathml/ ) since this page is longstanding. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment page was started in 2003 and has been widely edited. Don't know how to list this on math-related discussions, but that ought to be done. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 15:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done [2]. The Math wikiproject does not have a WP:DELSORT queue because a bot automatically lists relevant articles at WP:WPM/CA. This article isn't automatically considered relevant though. Pcap ping 16:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Documentation of texvc is sorely lacking. On the other hand, this is not a topic for an article. Solution: move this to the Wikipedia: namespace where it can be expanded into more complete documentation. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning toward Keep. Everybody uses TeX or LaTeX or the like every day (except some non-mathematicians) and although the article is phrase in such a way that a naive person might get the impression that Texvc is used ONLY within Wikipedia, it doesn't actually say that and it's easy to imagine enormous potential if it can be used on web pages generally. Can anyone inform us of the current extent of the use of Texvc? Michael Hardy (talk) 17:57, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict) There are a few papers on tug.org which say Wikipeida (meaning MediaWiki) uses a dialect of LaTeX known as texvc, but I did not see anything indicating that it's used elsewhere, unless you count the fact that MathType 6 supports the Wikipedia/texvc dialect (but without using texvc itself). There are some non-MediaWiki latex to image web services, but those use dvipng directly, because it can run as a persistent server process, which makes it very fast for that job—I read a conference paper about it a while back, but I can't find it now. Texvc now uses dvipng too. Texvc is not included in any TeX distributions, unlike dvipng. (By the way, there's also a dvi2svg these days, [3]). Pcap ping 18:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Interesting: most of the references that mention TeXvc in the scholar search appear to rely on our own article as a primary source. I think CBM's suggestion is a good one: move this into the Wikipedia namespace and expand. Given that our article appears to be referenced in the literature, would a soft redirect be warranted? (is one allowed?) Sławomir Biały (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the right namespace would be the meta/mediawiki one m:texvc or http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Texvc. Pcap ping 18:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm agnostic about which namespace it goes to. A soft redirect would be nice, though. Sławomir Biały (talk) 00:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is really not notable enough for a main space page, but this info should exist somewhere in the wikiverse. The definitive page should be http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Texvc, but I think there is enough justification (count the number of links to the page from project space pages) to move it to the Wikipedia: namespace with a link the the MediaWiki page. --Salix (talk): 21:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and revisit later This article has some potential. With a little love and some decent contributions, this could grow into a decent article. ShawnIsHere (talk) 08:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.