Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UVa Online Judge
Off the top of my head, I would have said delete because most grading software isn't notable. But this seems to have some coverage in academic papers and a book on preparing for ACM contests http://books.google.com/books?id=L87YClwiAtUC&pg=PA304&dq=%22UVa+Online+Judge%22+-inpublisher:icon&as_brr=0&ei=3M1YS-HpDJjQNODk0IIN&cd=2#v=onepage&q=%22UVa%20Online%20Judge%22%20-inpublisher%3Aicon&f=false (some of this text appears to have been recycled in other papers by the same authors) http://books.google.com/books?id=lcnSCDcDocMC&pg=PA2&dq=UVa+Online+Judge&ei=cs5YS5qGEInCMuLnsfUM&cd=4#v=onepage&q=UVa%20Online%20Judge&f=false (contest prep book) http://www.wcce2009.org/proceedings/papers/WCCE2009_pap76.pdf (round-up of on-line judges on p. 7). So, it is more notable than the average grading software. Also, a distinction must be made between academic software written to illustrate some idea, and software ''used'' in academia. This falls roughly in the latter category, so it needs to be treated as any other software, and it has independent secondary coverage  which is ''not'' just due dilligence in reporting related work in academic papers
— User:Pohta, 22:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)