Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of computer algebra systems
- Comparison of computer algebra systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article has multiple issues:
- It is pure WP:OR: Although there are published papers that compare some computer algebra systems, none is cited and the content of the article is not based of existing sources.
- Several of the cited softwares have nothing to do with computer algebra. "Computer algebra" implies the ability of doing some algebra on a computer. This excludes formula editors and software making only numerical floating point computation.
- Several of the cited software are experimental software, that have not been published nor cited in scientific publications, and therefore do not satisfy the General notability guideline.
- The article does makes any hierarchy between the systems, presenting at the same level widely used systems and confidential software (fringe software). Therefore the article does not satisfy the policy WP:NPOV.
It is not possible to rewrite this article for satisfying WP policies because of the lack of convenient sources. The only possibility that I see is to replace this article by sections in computer algebra systems, presenting the main computer algebra systems (with {{main}} template), explaining why there are important and summarizing their main abilities.. D.Lazard (talk) 17:37, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
keep -- I was surprised to see this article up for deletion, as I found it a useful CAS survey for an academic project two months ago. Regarding the issues raised,
- The main content of that article is a set of tables summarizing CAS software package properties and capabilities. If summarizing other sources is original research, then all of Wikipedia is original research. It's true that there are likely no primary sources comparing this particular set of computer algebra systems, but simply listing software properties is not original research.
- I have at least passing familiarity with about 60% of the programs mentioned, and all of them I know of have some computer algebra capability associated with them, as seen in the Functionality table. If some entries (please be specific) do not belong, that argues for the removal of those entries, not deletion of the whole article.
- It's true that some of CAS entries do not have links to original sources, and may or may not have citations available for them. Again, I cannot tell because specific examples were not mentioned. Links should be added, or perhaps these entries should be removed if they have insufficient citations/notability. But again, this does not argue for removal of the whole article.
- Lack of hierarchy is a good property of this article--it indicates a neutral point of view.
- I would not be opposed to merging this article with computer algebra systems, but only including a subset that are deemed important is a violation of a neutral point of view. As long as the CAS systems pass a notability threshold, they should be included/retained.
- I'll note every Wikipedia page of comparison of software system, e.g., Comparison of numerical analysis software, has the same lack of original article/citations giving comparisons of the exact set of systems in the tables. The article under discussion is no worse in this regard than other pages.