Talk:TeX Live

Sourcing, notability, etc.
I quit trying to make sense of the consensus long time ago, but apparently, the general word at the AfD is that nowadays the mere fact that software is included in prominent FOSS distributions, even as a default choice, is not a claim for notability. Heck, TeX itself is not a core component in operating systems these days - just a software package among many. And my policy-sight powers aren't as good as they have been, but we don't even seem to have a software notability guideline these days. Hence, General Notability Guidelines.

I have no idea where to even begin looking for the sources, but I could easily imagine that TeX Live, having been around for years, is a package that is prominent enough to warrant some sort of external coverage. Right?

I tagged this article for AfD, but pulled it back because I was teetering and ultimately stress made me do a wrong choice. Logically, this article is just as delete-worthy as MyPaint, and I can't really pre-emptively AfD this article because people would cry POINT. I'm confused by the deletion process and pray that someone who isn't confused won't AfD this thing too.

So please get here some solid external coverage. People always demand it. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 21:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * For notability see the AfD on poppler :-(.
 * I've already added an article from TUGboat. Do we need an article from some Linux magazine? See also Google news and Google scholar.--Oneiros (talk) 22:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Btw: It's mentioned in every other book on TeX (and included in some). Should I look for references?--Oneiros (talk) 22:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no doubt in my mind that this is notable. It is now the standard form of TeX in most Linux distributions. Yworo (talk) 18:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)