Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IKVM.NET Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/IKVM.NET

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IKVM.NET

All that I can find is download sites and tutorials. Fails WP:N. Joe Chill (talk) 16:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Cliff smith ^talk 16:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No references given in article. Software itself doesn't seem to notable, from Google searches. Netalarmtalk 05:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No Insufficient coverage in any reliable sources to evidence notability.Merge to Mono (software). Notability borderline in and of itself, but very solid in context of Mono. --Cybercobra (talk) 02:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- IKVM is not specific to Mono - it works equally well on Microsoft's .NET implementation, and in fact I believe it's more widely used on .NET than Mono. If it absolutely must be merged I'd instead move it to something along the lines of "CLR interoptability utilities", where things like P/Invoke, IronPython, IronRuby, IronScheme, C++/CLI, and the like could be merged into as well. Tuxcantfly (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually apparently IKVM is now bundled with recent versions of Mono hence merging it into the Mono article would also be an option. Tuxcantfly (talk) 08:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Merge into Mono (software) before I waffle again. --Cybercobra (talk) 09:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Given that IKVM is essentially a free JVM implemented in .NET using OpenJDK, it could also potentially be merged into Free Java implementations or OpenJDK Tuxcantfly (talk) 03:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep IKVM is widely used for Java and .NET interoperability these days. There are a variety of articles covering it, such as http://onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2004/08/18/ikvm.html from O'Reilly publications - I've also seen it mentioned in several Java and .NET programming books but don't remember their names off hand. Tuxcantfly (talk) 21:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Here's a book that covers, among other things, integrating Java programs into .NET using IKVM, I believe it satisfies WP:RS: http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596007928/index.html?CMP=ILL-4GV796923290 Tuxcantfly (talk) 23:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - The relevant portion of this book which covers IKVM, the chapter "Run Java in Mono", starting at pages 245, can be previewed through page 248 at http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596007928/preview.html Tuxcantfly (talk) 23:21, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Also another article covering IKVM, on Computerworld at http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9012144/Using_open_source_to_integrate_Java_into_.Net_apps?taxonomyId=63&intsrc=kc_feat.&taxonomyName=software_development Tuxcantfly (talk) 03:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Too short and of insufficient depth to be "significant" coverage. --Cybercobra (talk) 03:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The Code Project has articles which cover IKVM in greater depth at http://www.codeproject.com/KB/dotnet/Java_net.aspx as well as http://www.codeproject.com/KB/dotnet/csharpikvm.aspx?msg=1446971 Tuxcantfly (talk) 08:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, while not a reliable source itself, http://www.ikvm.net/stories.html lists several testimonials as to IKVM's use in industry. There was also quite a stir on various news sites like Slashot when Eclipse was successfully run unmodified on IKVM, one of the first free JVMs to do so, though of course none of those are reliable sources. Tuxcantfly (talk) 03:18, 15 August 2009 (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.