Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GEOS (software library)


 * 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 merge to JTS Topology Suite. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

GEOS (software library)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Prodded; deprodded with lengthy assertion of notability on the talk page but no actual evidence. So the reason for deleting I gave in the prod still stands:

Not notable: No reliable sources or indication why its notable. Certainly no presumption of notability as free software libraries very rarely are. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 01:34, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Notable: Anonymous has written long description of notability of lib. on Talk:GEOS_(software_library), which I hereby include by reference. S/He probably didn't understand about the difference of this deletion talk page and that talk page. Lib is used in other projects. GangofOne (talk) 23:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The talk page was created as the PROD was removed, which is a normal way to respond to a PROD. But it has nothing to support an assertion of notability. The 'references' are almost all links to Wikipedia which cannot be used as a source, except for a link to Google's documentation and to the company's web site, neither of which is a reliable secondary source. Checking 'what links here' almost none of the linked articles link to this one, which suggests that GEOS is not a significant component of them. I don't doubt it is used, perhaps even widely used, but it needs reliable sources saying so, and covering it in some depth.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 00:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

uhh - these comments are filled with apparently "wikipedia legalese" which I do not know.. however, I gather that the reviewer wants references from outside of WIkipedia.. I can supply those.. I (apparently mistakenly) thought that links to already-substantiated articles would mean something.. ok.. btw- the total number of desktop software users, for whom this library is .. how shall we say .. the definition of all geometry handling .. is greater than 100,000 users each month.. maybe not a big number for a twitter account, but a very very big number for serious science computation applications.. -- BrianMHamlin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.254.111.87 (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2015 (UTC) { — 142.254.111.87 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Number of users is irrelevant. I mean Windows is used by tens or hundreds of millions of people, includes many libraries, but we don't have articles for all or even most libraries in Windows. Only the ones that are independently notable, as they meet the general notability guideline. So yes, if you have some good quality, in depth and independent sources then please add them to the article and use them to expand it.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 02:20, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 07:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * perhaps merge with JTS Topology Suite ? GangofOne (talk) 07:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

yes, I can compromise.. adding this as a section to JTS seems fair.. I will discuss with colleagues BrianMHamlin  08 June 15  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.174.127.109 (talk) 16:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:12, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I have started editing the JTS page to include GEOS information. As agreed in the compromise (above), this GEOS page can be phased out after those edits are stable. -- BrianMHamlin


 * 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.