Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Image optimization

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 redirect to Digital image processing. Worthwhile content, if any, can be merged from history. Sandstein 17:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image optimization (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 is a Frankenstein article that employs the synthesis of published material to advance a position not supported by those material. It provides nothing more meaningful than the phrase "image optimization" itself.

Since the article is small, let's take a look at it piece by piece. The first sentence says: So far, this is the same as image editing. The next few sentences, however, cease to support this definition and only make sense when you put them in medical imaging context, where imaging is not the creation of what you see with your eyes, but merely a mean of creating 2D representations of the data in which you're interested. The sources confirm this error. The last sentence in the first paragraph is this:The source does not confirm this. It merely says DIO is an acronym for "digital image optimizer". Whether it is an app, library, piece of hardware, or human technician is not known.

This article is created by a single author and has not received a peer review. It has no inbound links. I should note, however, that it is important to assume good faith in its author. flowing dreams (talk page) 08:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. flowing dreams (talk page) 08:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. flowing dreams (talk page) 08:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. flowing dreams (talk page) 08:08, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. It is not nice to AfD an article just eight hours after its creation. Maybe its editor is a newbie and is still working on it. 31.7.119.23 (talk) 10:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• comment The phrase seems to mean different things in different contexts. GScholar picks up the cited papers and others that most commonly refer to medical imaging, though some other applications appear as well. Web hits by contrast are dominated by optimization of image files for web transmission/display. Mangoe (talk) 19:49, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I feel this default context you mentioned exacerbates the article's counter-informativeness. flowing dreams (talk page) 07:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• merge and redirect anything useful to digital image processing. SpinningSpark 22:57, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment "Digital image optimization" is a subset of Digital image processing. Given the breath of the existing literature on the topic, it seemed to me that an article would be appropriate, especially since the Digital image processing article did not directly address the topic. We used to create stub articles on Wikipedia on the premise that they could then be worked on communally. I hope that that hasn't changed. I strongly disagree with the Afd proposer that this article is synthesis. I have no theory to propose or ideology -- just facts from the literature. I urge those who are doing the analysis of whether to keep this article or not, to at least look at the materials inHemanth, Jude; Balas, Valentina Emilia, eds. (2018). "Preface". Nature Inspired Optimization Techniques for Image Processing Applications. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag. ISBN 978-3-319-96002-9., which is just one of many works in the field. The recognition that DOI is regularly employed as a synonym in the medical field was intended to help other editors to find additional sources and then to provide additional text. Mangoe says above that the term "seems to mean different things in different contexts." This is both true at the specific level and not true on the general level. While different techniques are used for different purposes, the overall goal remains that same (namely to preserve information) whether to highlight specific information (medical often) or to allow compression for digital transmission. Since the lead is broad strokes, it is up to the resultant specific sections to discuss the differences. --Bejnar (talk) 22:03, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi. I agree with everything you said, but they have no bearing on the current discussion. My concern is that the article, in this state, is counter-informative, because of piecing together contents from different contexts. The sentence about losslessness is categorically harmful. I strongly believe you must have not published the article in this state. flowing dreams (talk page) 07:48, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete due to unclear scope. (There was an AfD last week on "Image optimizer" which was a disambiguation page that was deleted – I was going to suggest disambiguation between Digital image processing and Image compression, but there is limited info on those pages.) The field of image processing is large, and this article is talking about all of the following at once: image enhancement, image processing algorithms that are optimized to run faster, and image compression optimization. "Digital Image Optimizer" is a term only used for some brands of medical ultrasonic devices. It seems undue to mention that images are optimized in systems that do digital image correlation / image segmentation, since that applies to all image processing systems, and image segmentation is not image optimization in itself. The claim in "The three major areas..." is not correct. The quote 1) does not add anything to the article and 2) is about optimization of algorithms and not optimization of images. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• merge and redirect related to digital image processing.[[User:halkett99|<b —Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 16 October 2019 (UTC) Striking per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Mz7 (talk) 04:08, 17 October 2019 (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.