This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Esoteric programming language article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Piet (programming language) page were merged into Esoteric programming language on 18 May 2013. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Piet (programming language) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 May 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esoteric programming language. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Chef (programming language) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 15 December 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esoteric programming language. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
I don't see any clear basis for saying Unlambda is more minimal than brainfuck. It would be correct to say it about Lazy K or Iota or the like. It's tricky comparing imperative languages to functional ones, but whereas brainfuck has eight commands in four matching pairs, Unlambda has a mixed bag of eleven or twelve functions, plus an application operation. So I'm going to delete the statement.
I noticed that Perl is listed as a "notable esoteric language". Is that a joke? The top of the article specifically says that languages like APL aren't considered esoteric. -- Piquan 23:57, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I question the etymology of Turing tarpit; the term is in fact due to Alan Perlis, who coined it well before the Whril language ever existed.
I think that 'not with the intention of being adopted for real-world programming' in introduction section is inappropriate and not true; There are several esolangs invented to test the concepts in programming before applying them to real programming such as 3code, which means esolangs are sometimes used to play a role of touchstone. I think some other expression like 'not with the intention of being directly used for real-world programming' describes esolang better. -- 218.233.56.240 05:33, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I have added a tag proposing that Discrete computer be merged into the Esoteric programming terms section of this article. The term doesn't seem to warrant its own article, at least not with the article in its current state, and this would seem to be the best place for the text. Please post comments on the proposal here. - N (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't "...and still the most elegant" (History section) a smidge POV? Not to mention bad grammar. How about "...and are considered the most elegant"?
I just edited the above and removed the double brackets from around "Discrete computer". That page no longer exists. Guy Macon ( talk) 02:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
The article mentions the existence of joke languages, yet doesn't go into any more depth than that. Should examples be included?
I propose:
-- BBM 03:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
In the May 19 2006 revision [3], the last sentence in the second paragraph of the opening reads:
I'm not quite convinced at this comparison. Especially after skimming thru the article on "nonsense verse" the sentence linked to, I'm hard-pressed to find a good connection between the two. The sentence also suffers from being vague about what "making no sense as a whole" actually mean? A programming language's syntax and semantics, even for most if not all esoteric programming languages, are still highly specified and well-defined, so in that aspect there is nothing "nonsensical" about an esoteric language. Similarly, the fact that it might not be very human-readable is not a convincing criteria of "nonsensical" — just because you cannot read, say, Chinese, doesn't mean it is a nonsensical language, right? (Besides, obsfucation is quite possible in rather conventional languages such as C anyway.)
So overall, I just see little value in this sentence and have taken the bold step to remove it. If anyone wants to add it back in, please consider significantly rephrasing it to avoid the issues I've raised. 24.16.27.166 12:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Why are the words "programming language" included as part of the article names for the esoteric programming languages? (See Category:Esoteric programming languages to understand what I mean. When we title an article, any text apart from the name of whatever the article is about is placed in brackets. So instead of TRUE programming language, the article should be titled TRUE, and instead of Lambda programming language, it should be Lambda (programming language) and linked to as disambiguation from the Lambda article. (Assuming Lambda programming language itself survives AfD, but that's not the point.)
This would bring the esoteric languages into consistency with the more familiar ones, such as C++, Visual Basic, Java (programming language) and a whole bunch of others. BrokenBeta [ talk · contribs 16:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Does there exist esolangs with objects (with of course highly limited functionality to the objects, but technically objects)? I am just pondering... -- Svippong - Talk 15:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
LOLCODE has an entry in wikipedia and it links to here, esoteric programming langauge, however on looking through the examples here they don't refer back to lolcode. I thought I'd mention it. I was going to just make the change myself, it's probably not much harder than typing this, however I don't know how to put in the web links. 82.35.13.32 23:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
"Some more popular languages may appear esoteric (in the usual sense of the word) to some, and though these could arguably be called "esoteric programming languages" too, this is not what is meant."
Thaddeus Slamp ( talk) 20:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
There is another "important", practical use of non deterministic languages. Evolutionary programming, such as Tierra (computer simulation).
Keybounce ( talk) 20:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I think to the vast majority of the planet, all programming language is esoteric... NERDS!- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
For an academic take, it might be worth looking at whether there's anything relevant to cite in:
{{
cite conference}}
: Unknown parameter |booktitle=
ignored (|book-title=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)-- Delirium ( talk) 22:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The notability of this article has been challenged, and the article proposed for deletion (to which I objected). I'm opening a discussion here. Zwilson ( talk) 20:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
I actually wonder about the notability, in terms of meeting Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Citing Category:Esoteric programming languages or the specific Wikipedia articles doesn't satisfy GNG because Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. Reddit and other user-generated content sites are also not considered reliable sources.
I was trying to verify some of the article's material, and most information is unreferenced or cites wikis, blogs, and personal websites that are not reliable sources. I found some reliable sources for some details, but almost none use the terms "esoteric programming language", "esoteric language", or "esolang". Many use "esoteric" in the generic, adjective sense, commonly referring to LISP, Prolog, PL/I, and APL as esoteric languages, but I'm not counting those. I found three published sources that use the terms the way this article does, plus some sort of slideshow used by a professor. All three published sources reference Wikipedia articles, but one of them does not reference Wikipedia specifically for the information on esoteric languages. (Not that it matters for notability; new terms and ideas are commonly created or popularized in Wikipedia articles, and once reliable sources use them, establish notability by citing those sources, even though the references are circular).
Another, perhaps looser, programmer culture is that of Esoteric Programming Languages or esolangs, which Wikipedia defines as 'programming language(s) designed as a test of the boundaries of computer programming language design, as a proof of concept, ...The rest I can't see (limited access via Google), but the index lists only that page for the term "esoteric programming language", so while reliable, it may not constitute "significant coverage".
15.2 Source of the Instruction Set: Simple, but efficient system of operators for program tree nodes is derived from an 'esoteric' programming language called brainf..k. [19], see Table 15.1. Its variant was used in [13], and shown the ability of 'digital abiogenesis' – emergence of a self-replicator among randomly generated programs. To study this ability, a further reduced system, in which only data processing instructions were preserved, was implemented here.
{{
cite book}}
: |work=
ignored (
help); Missing or empty |title=
(
help) This is a passing mention of the term, but is a reliable source; the reference cited as "[19]" is to the Wikipedia article
Brainfuck.Can anyone suggest other reliable sources that use these terms? –– Agyle ( talk) 10:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
http://www.equestriadaily.com/2012/10/fim-update.html The fim++ programing languaje created by Cereal Velocity and published they specification on Equestriadaily (link) count as a esoteric languaje?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.188.34.168 ( talk) 03:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
There isn't enough clear awareness on that Java is a esoteric language, and I keep seeing businesses use it because of this lack of knowledge, I vote it should be added to the page. -- 84.82.234.221 ( talk) 16:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Please use brainfuck instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.13.56.24 ( talk) 20:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Is the programming language really spelled "Wierd" or is that a typo? Upjav ( talk) 03:20, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
It really is. (Note the Not typo
template in the source.) The name is a
portmanteau of "weird" (because it is) and "wired" (because execution of its programs follows visual "wires"). --
Ørjan (
talk) 02:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I have tagged the sections 'FALSE' with a confusing tag. I believe that the actual code should be set on a newline, and not in the same line as the sentence.
JamesJNHu (
talk) 20:27, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
2 + 2 = 2048 is a impressive game, that is available in my ZEN Firefox O.S. mobile. I feel it is relevant to make a point about that game here.
User:Rhoark edited the section about Turing tarpits from
to
The latter is closer in spirit to the definition used in Wikipedia's Turing tarpit article, and has been so since 2010.
The problem is, the latter is definitely not the definition used in the esolang community for categorizing esolangs. As such, I think it doesn't belong in a list of esolang terms. To me the question, then, is whether to change it back (perhaps clarifying) or whether to delete the section outright. -- Ørjan ( talk) 03:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Would it be more appropriate to call Grass a Toy programming language? 157.127.239.146 ( talk) 19:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I created Ook! and linked it to the already existing foreign language versions. I made the disambiguation page ( ook ) point to it. It was nominated for deletion almost immediately after I created it. I'm considering adding what I created to this page and allowing it to be deleted. Then the disambiguation could be pointed to the section here. Not sure how the foreign language links would work. Not at all I assume. -Crunchy Numbers ( talk) 19:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Maybe the list should be trimmed down a bit. There's quite a few, and some of them don't really have a good reason to be there. I already nipped the bud on Train, and removed it from the list. Any more that might need trimmed? -- MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) ( talk) 22:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Other wikipedia articles link to the sections #Chef and #FALSE, but these sections were removed. Would it be better to add them back in, or remove the references? 72.83.125.130 ( talk) 14:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
In my opinion, Modiscript is not notable enough to be included in the list. After reading its documentation, it is abundantly clear that it is nothing more than a standard language with some variables and methods renamed. It was first removed by User:MoonyTheDwarf during the first round of trimming, and then numerous times by me and other users. However, anonymous editors always revert the edits without providing any further comment. Would anyone like to weigh in? Envysan ( talk) 22:47, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Chef programming language. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 22#Chef programming language until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Adumbrativus ( talk) 04:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
based on APL, which here is considered not "esoteric".
J allows composition of functions = Function-level programming, Function composition (computer science).
J is a very terse array programming language
"very terse" can make J seem "esoteric".
other than "terse", J could be described as "cryptic" or "obscure" or "easy to obfuscate" ( Obfuscation (software):
The lack of argument naming gives point-free style a reputation of being unnecessarily obscure, hence the epithet "pointless style".
src: Tacit programming
video: "The J Programming Language" by Tracy Harms (2013)
-- Milahu ( talk) 16:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
What does this have to do with hacking? Would really like to see some source for this They're popular among anyone who codes and wants to explore Turing-completeness or just for the lolz. Has nothing to do with hacking as far as I see it. I don't see any application where I, specifically as a hacker, would use an esoteric language or any reason why I find it cool, just because I'm a hacker. LPfote ( talk) 19:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2023 and 19 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CMA2379 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by KAN2035117 ( talk) 18:00, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Esoteric programming language article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Piet (programming language) page were merged into Esoteric programming language on 18 May 2013. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Piet (programming language) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 18 May 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esoteric programming language. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Chef (programming language) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 15 December 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Esoteric programming language. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
I don't see any clear basis for saying Unlambda is more minimal than brainfuck. It would be correct to say it about Lazy K or Iota or the like. It's tricky comparing imperative languages to functional ones, but whereas brainfuck has eight commands in four matching pairs, Unlambda has a mixed bag of eleven or twelve functions, plus an application operation. So I'm going to delete the statement.
I noticed that Perl is listed as a "notable esoteric language". Is that a joke? The top of the article specifically says that languages like APL aren't considered esoteric. -- Piquan 23:57, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I question the etymology of Turing tarpit; the term is in fact due to Alan Perlis, who coined it well before the Whril language ever existed.
I think that 'not with the intention of being adopted for real-world programming' in introduction section is inappropriate and not true; There are several esolangs invented to test the concepts in programming before applying them to real programming such as 3code, which means esolangs are sometimes used to play a role of touchstone. I think some other expression like 'not with the intention of being directly used for real-world programming' describes esolang better. -- 218.233.56.240 05:33, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
I have added a tag proposing that Discrete computer be merged into the Esoteric programming terms section of this article. The term doesn't seem to warrant its own article, at least not with the article in its current state, and this would seem to be the best place for the text. Please post comments on the proposal here. - N (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't "...and still the most elegant" (History section) a smidge POV? Not to mention bad grammar. How about "...and are considered the most elegant"?
I just edited the above and removed the double brackets from around "Discrete computer". That page no longer exists. Guy Macon ( talk) 02:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
The article mentions the existence of joke languages, yet doesn't go into any more depth than that. Should examples be included?
I propose:
-- BBM 03:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
In the May 19 2006 revision [3], the last sentence in the second paragraph of the opening reads:
I'm not quite convinced at this comparison. Especially after skimming thru the article on "nonsense verse" the sentence linked to, I'm hard-pressed to find a good connection between the two. The sentence also suffers from being vague about what "making no sense as a whole" actually mean? A programming language's syntax and semantics, even for most if not all esoteric programming languages, are still highly specified and well-defined, so in that aspect there is nothing "nonsensical" about an esoteric language. Similarly, the fact that it might not be very human-readable is not a convincing criteria of "nonsensical" — just because you cannot read, say, Chinese, doesn't mean it is a nonsensical language, right? (Besides, obsfucation is quite possible in rather conventional languages such as C anyway.)
So overall, I just see little value in this sentence and have taken the bold step to remove it. If anyone wants to add it back in, please consider significantly rephrasing it to avoid the issues I've raised. 24.16.27.166 12:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Why are the words "programming language" included as part of the article names for the esoteric programming languages? (See Category:Esoteric programming languages to understand what I mean. When we title an article, any text apart from the name of whatever the article is about is placed in brackets. So instead of TRUE programming language, the article should be titled TRUE, and instead of Lambda programming language, it should be Lambda (programming language) and linked to as disambiguation from the Lambda article. (Assuming Lambda programming language itself survives AfD, but that's not the point.)
This would bring the esoteric languages into consistency with the more familiar ones, such as C++, Visual Basic, Java (programming language) and a whole bunch of others. BrokenBeta [ talk · contribs 16:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Does there exist esolangs with objects (with of course highly limited functionality to the objects, but technically objects)? I am just pondering... -- Svippong - Talk 15:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
LOLCODE has an entry in wikipedia and it links to here, esoteric programming langauge, however on looking through the examples here they don't refer back to lolcode. I thought I'd mention it. I was going to just make the change myself, it's probably not much harder than typing this, however I don't know how to put in the web links. 82.35.13.32 23:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
"Some more popular languages may appear esoteric (in the usual sense of the word) to some, and though these could arguably be called "esoteric programming languages" too, this is not what is meant."
Thaddeus Slamp ( talk) 20:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
There is another "important", practical use of non deterministic languages. Evolutionary programming, such as Tierra (computer simulation).
Keybounce ( talk) 20:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I think to the vast majority of the planet, all programming language is esoteric... NERDS!- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
For an academic take, it might be worth looking at whether there's anything relevant to cite in:
{{
cite conference}}
: Unknown parameter |booktitle=
ignored (|book-title=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)-- Delirium ( talk) 22:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
The notability of this article has been challenged, and the article proposed for deletion (to which I objected). I'm opening a discussion here. Zwilson ( talk) 20:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
I actually wonder about the notability, in terms of meeting Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Citing Category:Esoteric programming languages or the specific Wikipedia articles doesn't satisfy GNG because Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source. Reddit and other user-generated content sites are also not considered reliable sources.
I was trying to verify some of the article's material, and most information is unreferenced or cites wikis, blogs, and personal websites that are not reliable sources. I found some reliable sources for some details, but almost none use the terms "esoteric programming language", "esoteric language", or "esolang". Many use "esoteric" in the generic, adjective sense, commonly referring to LISP, Prolog, PL/I, and APL as esoteric languages, but I'm not counting those. I found three published sources that use the terms the way this article does, plus some sort of slideshow used by a professor. All three published sources reference Wikipedia articles, but one of them does not reference Wikipedia specifically for the information on esoteric languages. (Not that it matters for notability; new terms and ideas are commonly created or popularized in Wikipedia articles, and once reliable sources use them, establish notability by citing those sources, even though the references are circular).
Another, perhaps looser, programmer culture is that of Esoteric Programming Languages or esolangs, which Wikipedia defines as 'programming language(s) designed as a test of the boundaries of computer programming language design, as a proof of concept, ...The rest I can't see (limited access via Google), but the index lists only that page for the term "esoteric programming language", so while reliable, it may not constitute "significant coverage".
15.2 Source of the Instruction Set: Simple, but efficient system of operators for program tree nodes is derived from an 'esoteric' programming language called brainf..k. [19], see Table 15.1. Its variant was used in [13], and shown the ability of 'digital abiogenesis' – emergence of a self-replicator among randomly generated programs. To study this ability, a further reduced system, in which only data processing instructions were preserved, was implemented here.
{{
cite book}}
: |work=
ignored (
help); Missing or empty |title=
(
help) This is a passing mention of the term, but is a reliable source; the reference cited as "[19]" is to the Wikipedia article
Brainfuck.Can anyone suggest other reliable sources that use these terms? –– Agyle ( talk) 10:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
http://www.equestriadaily.com/2012/10/fim-update.html The fim++ programing languaje created by Cereal Velocity and published they specification on Equestriadaily (link) count as a esoteric languaje?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.188.34.168 ( talk) 03:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
There isn't enough clear awareness on that Java is a esoteric language, and I keep seeing businesses use it because of this lack of knowledge, I vote it should be added to the page. -- 84.82.234.221 ( talk) 16:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Please use brainfuck instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.13.56.24 ( talk) 20:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Is the programming language really spelled "Wierd" or is that a typo? Upjav ( talk) 03:20, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
It really is. (Note the Not typo
template in the source.) The name is a
portmanteau of "weird" (because it is) and "wired" (because execution of its programs follows visual "wires"). --
Ørjan (
talk) 02:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello. I have tagged the sections 'FALSE' with a confusing tag. I believe that the actual code should be set on a newline, and not in the same line as the sentence.
JamesJNHu (
talk) 20:27, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
2 + 2 = 2048 is a impressive game, that is available in my ZEN Firefox O.S. mobile. I feel it is relevant to make a point about that game here.
User:Rhoark edited the section about Turing tarpits from
to
The latter is closer in spirit to the definition used in Wikipedia's Turing tarpit article, and has been so since 2010.
The problem is, the latter is definitely not the definition used in the esolang community for categorizing esolangs. As such, I think it doesn't belong in a list of esolang terms. To me the question, then, is whether to change it back (perhaps clarifying) or whether to delete the section outright. -- Ørjan ( talk) 03:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Would it be more appropriate to call Grass a Toy programming language? 157.127.239.146 ( talk) 19:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
I created Ook! and linked it to the already existing foreign language versions. I made the disambiguation page ( ook ) point to it. It was nominated for deletion almost immediately after I created it. I'm considering adding what I created to this page and allowing it to be deleted. Then the disambiguation could be pointed to the section here. Not sure how the foreign language links would work. Not at all I assume. -Crunchy Numbers ( talk) 19:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Maybe the list should be trimmed down a bit. There's quite a few, and some of them don't really have a good reason to be there. I already nipped the bud on Train, and removed it from the list. Any more that might need trimmed? -- MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) ( talk) 22:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Other wikipedia articles link to the sections #Chef and #FALSE, but these sections were removed. Would it be better to add them back in, or remove the references? 72.83.125.130 ( talk) 14:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
In my opinion, Modiscript is not notable enough to be included in the list. After reading its documentation, it is abundantly clear that it is nothing more than a standard language with some variables and methods renamed. It was first removed by User:MoonyTheDwarf during the first round of trimming, and then numerous times by me and other users. However, anonymous editors always revert the edits without providing any further comment. Would anyone like to weigh in? Envysan ( talk) 22:47, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Chef programming language. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 22#Chef programming language until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Adumbrativus ( talk) 04:46, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
based on APL, which here is considered not "esoteric".
J allows composition of functions = Function-level programming, Function composition (computer science).
J is a very terse array programming language
"very terse" can make J seem "esoteric".
other than "terse", J could be described as "cryptic" or "obscure" or "easy to obfuscate" ( Obfuscation (software):
The lack of argument naming gives point-free style a reputation of being unnecessarily obscure, hence the epithet "pointless style".
src: Tacit programming
video: "The J Programming Language" by Tracy Harms (2013)
-- Milahu ( talk) 16:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
What does this have to do with hacking? Would really like to see some source for this They're popular among anyone who codes and wants to explore Turing-completeness or just for the lolz. Has nothing to do with hacking as far as I see it. I don't see any application where I, specifically as a hacker, would use an esoteric language or any reason why I find it cool, just because I'm a hacker. LPfote ( talk) 19:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2023 and 19 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CMA2379 ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by KAN2035117 ( talk) 18:00, 16 November 2023 (UTC)