Talk:KaTeX

Maintenance and rating of JavaScript articles
Concerning editing and maintaining JavaScript-related articles...

Collaboration...
If you are interested in collaborating on JavaScript articles or would like to see where you could help, stop by WikiProject JavaScript and feel free to add your name to the participants list. Both editors and programmers are welcome.

Where to list JavaScript articles
We've found over 300 JavaScript-related articles so far. If you come across any others, please add them to that list.

User scripts
The WikiProject is also taking on the organization of the Wikipedia community's user script support pages. If you are interested in helping to organize information on the user scripts (or are curious about what we are up to), let us know!

If you have need for a user script that does not yet exist, or you have a cool idea for a user script or gadget, you can post it at User scripts/Requests. And if you are a JavaScript programmer, that's a great place to find tasks if you are bored.

How to report JavaScript articles in need of attention
If you come across a JavaScript article desperately in need of editor attention, and it's beyond your ability to handle, you can add it to our list of JavaScript-related articles that need attention.

Rating JavaScript articles
At the top of the talk page of most every JavaScript-related article is a WikiProject JavaScript template where you can record the quality class and importance of the article. Doing so will help the community track the stage of completion and watch the highest priority articles more closely.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 01:11, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Advert tag
Pinging @.

The reason I tagged the article was because of the phrases like "It puts special emphasis on being fast and easy to use" and the list of advantages at the end. I also fail to see how the article "accurately describes how the focus of KaTeX differs from its chief competitor, MathJax". Also, how do you know its chief competitors? It's not mentioned in the article. &#9816;MEisSCAMMER 19:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It is false that MathJax is not mentioned; it is linked on the last line of the "features" section. I have used MathJax on some of my web pages, but otherwise have no connection with either project. In particular, having chosen to go with other systems than KaTeX, I have no reason for bias towards KaTeX. The point of "special emphasis on being fast and easy to use" is to differentiate from MathJax's prioritization of getting the mathematics correct, first, and only after that looking at speed and ease of use. (Let's not even talk about MathML's priorities which do not appear to include any of those things.) It is normal, in an article about a software library (or anything else) for which alternatives are available, to describe the characteristics that might make it better than its alternatives. Doing so, based on proper independent sourcing, is just standard encyclopedic writing, not advertising. Omitting an evaluation of the library from our article would not make it more neutral, only more uninformative. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:32, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Comparison to MathJax
I saw you reverted my second edit for the citations. The reason in your edit seems perfectly valid to me, so I don't see any issues with it. :) I did think the comparison could be worded a little better though, so I've made that edit. If you think that doesn't belong, I don't mind it being reverted too (although I hope it's OK). AlexGallon (talk) 21:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)