Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guide to Available Mathematical Software

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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Guide to Available Mathematical Software

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

The topic of this article is a web site. There are no secondary sources that attest the notability of this site. The web site lists mathematical software as installed on the servers of NIST. It has little interest for practitioners outside NIST. An article about this web site has even less interest. -- Oisguad (talk) 20:11, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. My opinion on this might be stronger if we had anything more than the thinnest of stubs here. In any case, the nomination isn't particularly accurate (specifically: this is a public-facing service, not software internal to NIST). In any case, this looks like secondary source coverage, and this journal article is technically not independent (author is a NIST researcher), but represents something of an analysis of the system. Other sources seem forthcoming from both Books and Scholar searches (although there are some false positives, especially with the journal search). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 22:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:06, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:06, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 04:06, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There are plenty of book sources on this, some of which I just added to the article. It's a stub now, but that's not a good reason for deletion. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the first couple of refs are a little short and might be deemed mentions (though focused ones) but the others are more than sufficient to provide WP:SIGCOV. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:11, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Respectable stub on a legitimate topic. XOR'easter (talk) 19:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw - ok, I see your arguments, and the little improvements of the article, and therefore I withdraw my deletion proposal. -- Oisguad (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2018 (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.