- 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 delete. Deor ( talk) 11:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Links (programming language) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
unsourced article, does not appear to be a notable programming language Gaijin42 ( talk) 18:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 18:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete – Is (was?) a project at the University of Edinburgh. A test of programming languages is whether they are used by anyone other than their creators, and this one doesn't seem to be, aside from one German dissertation.That might be because it appears to use a rather esoteric functional programming language ( OCaml). Microsoft has a component called LINQ that is similar, and they are sometimes mentioned together, but LINQ works with Visual Studio, so there is no competition there. If we kept it, it would be only for the sake of completeness. – Margin1522 ( talk) 20:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. I could not find any significant third party coverage, a requirement for notability per WP:SIGCOV. Piboy51 ( talk) 20:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think there might be one source here. Bananasoldier ( talk) 04:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The main publication about this language has 239 citations according to GScholar. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 22:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. No coverage in reliable sources. APerson ( talk!) 00:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per Margin1522. All information I can find about this subject related to it being only a project at the University of Edinburgh. Steel1943 ( talk) 00:20, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 delete. Deor ( talk) 11:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Links (programming language) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
unsourced article, does not appear to be a notable programming language Gaijin42 ( talk) 18:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 18:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete – Is (was?) a project at the University of Edinburgh. A test of programming languages is whether they are used by anyone other than their creators, and this one doesn't seem to be, aside from one German dissertation.That might be because it appears to use a rather esoteric functional programming language ( OCaml). Microsoft has a component called LINQ that is similar, and they are sometimes mentioned together, but LINQ works with Visual Studio, so there is no competition there. If we kept it, it would be only for the sake of completeness. – Margin1522 ( talk) 20:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. I could not find any significant third party coverage, a requirement for notability per WP:SIGCOV. Piboy51 ( talk) 20:56, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:19, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think there might be one source here. Bananasoldier ( talk) 04:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The main publication about this language has 239 citations according to GScholar. QVVERTYVS ( hm?) 22:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. No coverage in reliable sources. APerson ( talk!) 00:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per Margin1522. All information I can find about this subject related to it being only a project at the University of Edinburgh. Steel1943 ( talk) 00:20, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- 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.