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

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 delete. Lacking coverage and content. NJA (t/c) 10:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MathScriptor

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

I can't find significant coverage in secondary sources for this software. There's a Lulu.com book by the software's author, but that's essentially self-pub; I'd give it some weight if it were written by someone else. In its defense, it a appears to be used at a few universities, so I didn't just prod it. The article is a bit promotional given the WP:OR matrix comparing it with established software of this kind. Pcap ping 00:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 00:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this software. Joe Chill (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Maybe a slight vanity tinge to this, but used at a major university apparently, and available for general use. Not reason to delete. LotLE×talk 20:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- COI! You are a Lulu too! ;-) Pcap ping 20:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No sources provided. Intro paragraph is spammy, providing download links. Miami33139 (talk) 22:48, 12 January 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.