Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MSU Lossless Video Codec
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- MSU Lossless Video Codec (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find significant coverage for this codec. Joe Chill (talk) 12:35, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Some : I've worked in this area in the past and lost touch with state of art but seems to be some hits buried in here, http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=moscow+lossless+video&btnG=Search , and it looks like one patent by an unrelated group http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7417570.html refers to it by this name so it is likely to be known. I would give it a chance before deleting. Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 14:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep: Very hard to find stuff via Google web search [1]. There are, however, a handful of studies on the efficiency of the codec compared to similar lossless codecs available on gScholar [2]. If anyone else can find some reliable sources it would really help. --Odie5533 (talk) 19:19, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Academically notable, as per Odie5533. --Cyclopia - talk 20:11, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep per Odie5533 (the fact it exists on numerous reputable download sites masks any commentary) Also linked to in compression template. (Those aren't additional reasons to keep, just observations) --Cedderstk 19:20, 11 October 2009 (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.