Template talk:Programming languages: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:01, 1 February 2005

Latest revision as of 04:25, 18 July 2024

(394 intermediate revisions by 79 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject banner shell|

== History of this box ==

{{WikiProject Computing}}

}}

{{archives}}

== Deleted ==

Initially, this box was placed on [[C programming language]] and some other articles by [[User: Lee1026]]. It seems like a useful addition, so I converted it to a template and proceeded to add it to the bottom of all articles it lists. It is certainly somewhat biased in what languages it includes — but feel free to edit, as long as it remains relatively small. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 21:01, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This template has been deleted per [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_May_25#Template:Major_programming_languages]]. I have left the talk page in place if people want to discuss alternatives to this template. —''[[User:R._Koot|Ruud]]'' 20:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

:I was one who originally wanted to delete this template because of its inherit POV issues, but ultimately I agreed with other editors on a compromise of using this template as a navigation aid. I do agree that the template had gotten out of hand as fans of non-major languages kept inserting their favorite languages. I would have voted to keep and fix the inclusion criteria (as I had lobbied to do at another time, but was shot down). At any rate, I am sad that as a significant editor of this template, I was not notified that the template was up for deletion. Wikipedia needs to be changed to make it a requirement that all past editors are notified when something is brought up for deletion consideration. &mdash; [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:white; background-color: green;">&nbsp;'''Stevie is the man!'''&nbsp;</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|Work]]} 19:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

== Language inclusion criteria ==

::You didn't follow the deletion discussion? [[User:Mkb218|matt kane&#39;s brain]] 21:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

''<nowiki>[The article]</nowiki> is certainly somewhat biased in what languages it includes &mdash; but feel free to edit, as long as it remains relatively small''. --Deco, above

::Too:I imprecisedidn't andknow veryit openwas toup for interpretationdeletion. AnybodyI elsedon't wantwatch all articles I've ever edited. I like to takemaintain amy stab?sanity. :) &mdash; [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:greenwhite;font background-weightcolor:bold green;">&nbsp;'''Stevie is the man!'''&nbsp;</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Contrib</span>Work]]} 22:10:48, 112 FebJune 20052006 (UTC)

:Thanks for the invitation -- but beware; someone might take it up :) On a more serious note, I personally would bring the inclusion of e.g. ''Haskell'' into question. What criteria should we use? In any case, I think we'd better restrict the number of languages in this particular "in crowd" to the ones with a ''very'' significant number of users all around the world. Now, how to determine ''N_users'' ... --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 21:43, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

_khkuuhku

::::Oh, I thought that you meant you were the one who nominated it for deletion. Is it forbidden to bring it back now? [[User:Mkb218|matt kane&#39;s brain]] 12:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

:::::If something has been deleted, it is generally not a good idea to try to resurrect it, unless perhaps all the problems discussed in the deletion process are resolved. &mdash; [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:white; background-color: green;">&nbsp;'''Stevie is the man!'''&nbsp;</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|Work]]} 17:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

:Oops, forgot: also include ''historically'' very significant languages, I guess. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 21:48, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

:One idea that came to me is that perhaps we should have a template that linked to '''families''' of programming language, with the actual languages linked on those articles. It is ''usually'' easier to get people to agree on a classification of a language than it is to get them to agree on its notability, and things can always be in two lists if necessary. [[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]] 18:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

:: My criterion was just that I'd heard of it (I'm only unsure about SAS). Originally, Lee1026 included the following text above the box: "The following are major programming languages used by at least several thousand programmers worldwide". This seems rather difficult to verify. I'd say any language given a significant treatment in a textbook on programming languages is probably good (like Pascal, ML, Lisp, FORTRAN, Prolog, C, C++ have.) All "mainstream" languages qualify, and we more or less know what those are (mainly, Java, C, C++, VB, maybe Delphi). We could even factor in Wikipedia page visit counts. I think it will ultimately come down to a case-by-case treatment. The most important thing, though, is that it remains exclusive enough so that it is small enough to be useful and avoid clutter. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 21:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

:I'm the template creator. I was not aware that the template was up for deletion, although I had been watching it, but I rather expected it to get deleted eventually - although I believe it was a useful navigation aid, it was too subjective. As for linking to proglang families, adding more clicks to reach common articles of interest compromises its role as a navigation aid. Maybe it would be better to define a similar template using a purely objective criterion such as statistics research listing the number of programmers who know/use a language. Whatever. [[User:Deco|Deco]] 20:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

:::Your criteria above corresponds very much with my own, so there's two wikipedians -- couple of thousand other opinionated prog lang interested geeks soon to pitch in with their say :) I have done some preliminary(?) trimming already, removing some very ___domain-specific languages and some with that characteristic as well as being tied to specific companies. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 22:20, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

== merging template ==

::::Okay, looks good to me, just make sure that the box is kept only on pages of those languages in the box. I don't agree, though, with the exclusion of Eiffell, Haskell, or especially OCaml; they're all general-purpose languages used quite widely (admittedly, OCaml is a dialect of ML, but this isn't quite as obvious as the fact that [[Common Lisp]] is a dialect of Lisp). All four give 300K+ Google hits together with the word "language", and in my own experience they're popular in a number of significant circles in schools and industry. IDL is also used widely in industry, even if it isn't general-purpose. I added these four back. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 22:35, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

suggest merging with the following [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Programming_language template]

{{Navbox

|name = Programming language

|title = [[Programming language]]s

|group1 = General Topics

:::::I removed OCaml exactly for the reason you mentioned -- readers will find that one immediately via ML, so I think it should be left out of the box, like Common Lisp. Talking of removal, I'll now remove Modula, which only gets half as many hits as the ones you mention and because its predecessor Pascal is much more important historically as well as in terms of user community incl education. Generally, most of the other 'boxed' languages in use today give millions of hits (even SAS, a quite 'lowly' one, gives ~1.5M, while LOGO gives ~11M, and ML as well as C# gives ~3M).

|list1 = [[History of programming languages|History]]{{·}} Generation: ([[First-generation programming language|1GL]] / [[second-generation programming language|2GL]] / [[third-generation programming language|3GL]] / [[fourth-generation programming language|4GL]] / [[fifth-generation programming language|5GL]]) {{·}} [[Low-level programming language|Low level]]{{·}} [[High-level programming language|High level]] [[Very high-level programming language|Very High level (abstraction)]]

|group2 = Types

:::::I must admit I still think Eiffel, Haskell and IDL should be removed based on their 'insignificance' historically and/or 'user base wise' compared to most of the other languages. And IDL describes a type/family of languages, doesn't it? BTW, I did delete the template from the articles of the languages I removed (or did I forget some?) ;-) --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 23:18, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

|list2 = [[Programming language|Programming]] · [[Specification language|Specification]] · [[Query language|Query]] · [[Markup language|Markup]] · [[Transformation language|Transformation]] · [[Template processor|Template processing]] · [[Hardware description language|Hardware description]] · [[Style sheet language|Stylesheet]] · [[Data modeling language|Data modeling]]

|group3 = Sub-types

:::::Presiceification/encyclopedical-editorial modification: if IDLs are actually to be defined as ''programming'' languages (as opposed to the more general class of ''computer'' languages), which I think is a valid question in itself, I agree that it/they should be included here (CORBA et al. are VIPLs, most certainly). As for historical significance, I actually think one might consider [[Simula]] (although I could be said to be slightly biased re that -- exactly why is left as an exercise for the reader :-] ), which arguably represented the birth of object-oriented programming (and which inspired [[Bjarne Stroustrup|Bjarne]] to create C++). --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 23:35, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

|list3 = [[Array programming|Array]] {{·}} [[Assembly language|Assembly]] {{·}} [[Compiled language|Compiled]] {{·}} [[Concurrent computing|Concurrent]] {{·}} [[Curly bracket programming language|Curly bracket]] {{·}} [[Data-oriented language|Data-oriented]] {{·}} [[Data-structured language|Data-structured]] {{·}} [[Dataflow programming|Dataflow]] {{·}} [[Declarative programming language|Declarative]] {{·}} [[Domain-specific programming language|Domain-specific]] {{·}} [[Esoteric programming language|Esoteric]] {{·}} [[Extension programming language|Extension]] {{·}} [[Functional programming|Functional]] {{·}} [[Imperative programming|Imperative]] {{·}} [[Interpreted language|Interpreted]] {{·}} [[Logic programming|Logic]] {{·}} [[Machine code|Machine]] {{·}} [[Macro (computer science)|Macro]] {{·}} [[Metaprogramming]] {{·}} [[Multi-paradigm programming language|Multi-paradigm]] {{·}} [[Non-English-based programming languages|Non-English-based]] {{·}} [[Object-oriented programming language|Object-oriented]] {{·}} [[Off-side rule]] {{·}} [[Pipeline programming|Pipeline]] {{·}} [[Procedural programming|Procedural]] {{·}} [[Prototype-based programming|Prototype-based]] {{·}} [[Reflection (computer science)|Reflective]] {{·}} [[Rule-based language|Rule-based]] {{·}} [[Scripting language|Scripting]] {{·}} [[Synchronous programming language|Synchronous]] {{·}} [[Visual programming language|Visual]]

|group4 = Other

::::::I only recommended keeping Ocaml because more people seem to know what Ocaml is than know what ML is, even though Ocaml ''is'' ML, due to its popularity, but I may be mistaken in this impression, so I removed it. I recommend keeping IDL because it has a strong industry presence, although it's certainly not a "programming language" ''per se''. As for Haskell and Eiffel, even if they're not used often in industry, they're very popular in academia and they've had a strong influence on software engineering and programming language design (Eiffel pretty much invented [[design by contract]], and a discussion of functional languages that doesn't mention Haskell would surely be incomplete). In my experience in PL research their names seem to come up all the time. As I said, I'm afraid it really will come down to having to argue each language on a case-by-case basis. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 23:37, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

|list4 = [[Non-English-based programming languages|Non-English-based]]

|group5 = List

::::::Oh, and as for Simula, I don't object, although all the other "historical" languages in the list also have or had heavy use in practice. I'm sure Stroustrup had more than Simula on his mind though &mdash; he couldn't have missed Smalltalk. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 23:45, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

|list5 = Lists by ([[Categorical list of programming languages|Categorical]]{{·}} [[Generational list of programming languages|Generational]] {{·}} [[Timeline of programming languages|Chronological]]{{·}} [[Alphabetical list of programming languages|Alphabetical]]){{·}} [[Comparison of programming languages|Comparison]]

}}<noinclude>

:::::::...which is no problem, since it's already included :-) Regarding the other stuff, I think we might have reached a kind of consensus now -- agree? Always nice with some constructive (and talking for myself at least, educational/enlightening) 'shop talk'! For more volatile personalities, I guess this topic is food for rv wars :) --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 23:54, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

::::::::Agreed. :-) Here's to hoping the extremists give us a rest first. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 23:59, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

</noinclude>

:I think the most constructive thing to do would be to destroy this template. "Major" is perpetually impossible to define, esp. with programmers usually fighting endlessly for their favorite languages. I just don't see an encyclopedic purpose for the template, esp. when lists of programming languages (including specific types of languages) already exist. Therefore, the reasonable good thing to do would be to end the template's existence. --[[User:Stevietheman|Stevietheman]] 21:19, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

--[[User:Ramu50|Ramu50]] ([[User talk:Ramu50|talk]]) 01:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

::I'd agree if it weren't for the fact that that simply hasn't happened. No one's complained about the list even a bit. I never came to arms with Wernher, and no one else has made any major changes. The originator of the box idea seems to have vanished. I'm not sure yet whether people are content or apathetic with the box.

::Of course the reason the box exists is its practical utility. Just as [[EXPTIME]] has a box of major complexity classes which is quite subjective, it's handy to have a quick way to visit a number of important topics in a specific area. The items in this box are quite subjective, but the function of the box is not to make claims but to aid navigation. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 05:11, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

{{Programming language generations}}

:::I understand your point of view, but what I'm saying is that the list is super-subjective and conflict-baiting whether or not there are currently complaints about it. In other words, it's not of encyclopedic relevance.

{{Computer language}}

{{Programming language}}

--[[User:Ramu50|Ramu50]] ([[User talk:Ramu50|talk]]) 23:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

== Bash ==

:::Further, I don't see the navigational significance of it, in that if I'm looking up an article on [[PHP]], I'm not also looking up an article on [[Perl]] or another language in the "major" list in the vast majority of moments. But note, that in many of the language articles, there are references to other languages in comparison, so visitors can use those links to jump. We're also smartly categorizing languages now, so it's easy to jump to a category and see similar languages in a specific context. On top of all this, it just takes up space--I've never used it to jump to another language--ever. This criticism is basically that the list is redundant and probably not going to be useful in actual encyclopedia use. --[[User:Stevietheman|Stevietheman]] 16:28, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Why is Bash listed as a language, rather than "shell script" or "bourne shell scripting"?

:::: I understand if you don't find it useful personally, but neither of us can definitively claim whether or not people are using it. I can say that I've used the similar [[Template: ComplexityClasses]] a lot. I've attempted to keep it small while not omitting anything too important, but if you feel it's too large it can definitely be stripped down more. I realise that categories are available (the box links one, in fact) but ''n'' clicks and page loads is still a lot better than 2''n'', and the categories are also a bit overwhelming in size. The links in comparison are useful when reading through the text, but less useful for "touring" the articles, since they're buried and incomplete. If you feel so inclined you can submit the template to [[Wikipedia: Templates for deletion]], but I should warn you that they've kept some weird stuff. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 03:40, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Bash is a single shell implementation.

It's not even used on many unixlikes: BSDs, etc.

== Lua ==

== Keep box at two text lines only? ==

Looking at this, and I realize this is always an arbitrary point, but I wonder why [[Lua (programming language)|Lua]] is not included? [[User:Comrade Graham|Technopeasant]] ([[User talk:Comrade Graham|talk]]) 22:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

== Criteria and status ==

The reason I reverted a recent edit which put a separate line of links below the list of languages, was that I believe it's a virtue to keep such listboxes at an absolute minimum number of lines. Besides, the suggested extra link to the chrono list of languages may be viewed as superfluous, since the same link is one of the very first one meets at the alphalist page (even though this leads to one further click, I admit). A reasonable alternative might be to add the alphalist link in the header, I guess. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 22:53, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I am confused by [[#Deleted]], since recent edits have added invocations on several pages. Also, I don't see any discussion of criteria. Is there any reason not to list

:The alphalist is the 'more' link in the header. I changed the template to match the style that used to be in the proposed re-write of [[Programming language]], until I replaced it with this template. [[User:Noisy|Noisy]] | [[User talk:Noisy|Talk]] 00:34, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

* [[PL/I]]

::Argh. Argh. Argh. I meant chronolist above, of course (i.e. please execute alpha^H^H^H^H^Hchronolist). The argument holds anyway, I guess. Also, where should we place the limit on included links; we've got the alpha and chronolist, and the generational list, and the esoteric languages list... Oh well. --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 14:03, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

* [[Rexx]]

* [[Raku (programming language)|Raku]] (Perl 6)

"Assembly" is listed as a language but it is actually a type of languages, and the syntax of assemblers varies drastically even for a single machine. [[User:Chatul|Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul]] ([[User talk:Chatul|talk]]) 15:33, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

:Don't forget that the number of lines in the box depends entirely on your browser window's width. When I view at 1280 x 1024 maximized I see well under 2 lines, while 1024 x 768 has about 2 (maybe just over), and 640 x 480 has more like 4 lines. Really tiny windows, like a non-maximized window on 640 x 480, can have like 6-8. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 01:28, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

== Removing recent additions ==

::Yup, true. I tend to kind of assume that the majority of readers view Wikipedia with 1024 x 768 resolution or higher (that assumption might be taken as a little arrogant, perhaps). But still, the argument generally holds, I think, since the smaller the box--within sensible limits--the less space it generates). --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 14:03, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I recently removed two languages that were added (cc {{u|Poppodoms}}), [[ArkTS]] and [[Cangjie (programming language)]], as they both very recent, [[Huawei]]-developed languages that as far as I know do not have wide usage and have not influenced other languages. My removal was reverted and so I'm opening a discussion here. I think if anyone else wants to remove them per [[WP:BRD]], that would be fine, otherwise I will remove them if there's no strong argument for retaining them in the next few days, also per [[WP:BRD]]. [[User:Skynxnex|Skynxnex]] ([[User talk:Skynxnex|talk]]) 18:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

==Define "major"==

Precision is key to an encyclopedia, whether anyone "complains" about an article/template or not. To that end, we need to have a precise definition of "major" somewhere as a way of sourcing this template. I don't want to jump to tfd as I would normally like. I want to give those interested in this template a chance to refine it first. Note that previously I attempted to create a somewhat scientific basis for the list when it was in a different incarnation. Now, I'm not so arrogant as to think my approach was best&mdash;I merely want ''one reasonable basis'' for the list to be found and agreed upon. "Major" as it currently stands (here and in the category of the same name) is really too nebulous and doesn't provide encyclopedic relevance. &mdash; [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">Stevie is the man!</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Contrib</span>]]} 19:15, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:That second criteria should be the argument to also remove Apple Swift, because it have also not influenced other languages, it is only Apple centric. And there other programming languages that have no wide usage that are on the list as well. So I challenge this argument [[User:Poppodoms|Poppodoms]] ([[User talk:Poppodoms|talk]]) 06:54, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

:I thought the discussion thread "Language inclusion criteria" addressed this question in a practical way. To date, our definition of "major" has been a mix of "significant by number of users" and/or "historical importance". What other way to define it? I think a measure of the latter is possible to obtain by reading some reference literature on programming languages (e.g. the "major" textbooks used in university level courses on the subject). --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 09:43, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

:If you want to make this site, this encyclopaedia that is part of it's objective, the free encyclopaedia with a global logo of symbols and languages. Make it global and objective for the world, the world to be informed in a changing emerging market with an emerging 3rd mobile platform with 900 million install base and 4% global market share outside 17% local market share over Apple iOS, then it should not be reduced to being US centric in this subject matter of programming languages, technologies, don't make it geopolitical nor "US/Western" only. You said, these new programming languages are "not significant" because it's "not widely used" = your assumption is "Chinese centric", "local", there are programming languages on the list from US and few European markets that are not "widely used" outside the United States and Western Europe, outside smaller western markets. So, make the list objective and keep Wikipedia global in wide information. I will continue to make the strong argument for this case and will continue to do so for the next few days until it is resolved in keeping this list at a balance, fair and objective list. [[User:Poppodoms|Poppodoms]] ([[User talk:Poppodoms|talk]]) 07:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

::i agree with poppodoms, he's right. [[User:XeVierTech|XeVierTech]] ([[User talk:XeVierTech|talk]]) 08:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

::Too imprecise and very open to interpretation. Anybody else want to take a stab? &mdash; [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">Stevie is the man!</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Contrib</span>]]} 10:48, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

::The proper place for these two languages are in [[List of programming languages]] (which I notice you haven't added them to), not the limited space in the template. I agree that it's important to make sure the list isn't western-centric but nothing I've read suggests that either language comes close to overall impact as any of the other languages listed. [[ArkTS]], for example, is mostly cited to first-party sources and press release-style news.

::For example, if I noticed and thought about it how I happened to in this case, I probably would argue that [[Dart (programming language)]] should not be on the list, even though it's from Google and used as the language of Flutter. Lists like this are hard but more valuable to the reader if we keep them to languages that have had impact on programming languages in general, which Swift (partly due to its age now) has had. But we're not discussing every entry right now, just these two which are completely out of line compared to the others. [[User:Skynxnex|Skynxnex]] ([[User talk:Skynxnex|talk]]) 12:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

:::Hmm, I don't want to let go just yet. :-) In what way(s) do you think the included languages aren't major in relation to the enormous lot of other lesser known and less used and not at all historically significant languages out there? Is there any doubt that e.g. ALGOL, BASIC, C, COBOL and Fortran, say, are historically (and also, I might add, N_users-wise) significant? --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 11:04, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

:::Exactly, now you get it, that's all. Make it balanced. I get what you are saying, I agree with you when it comes to less notable like Dart. [[User:Poppodoms|Poppodoms]] ([[User talk:Poppodoms|talk]]) 12:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

::::Based my knowledge and some new searching, Dart (which is not currently in this template, to be clear) is significantly more notable, and impacts more platforms, than either language you added. [[User:Skynxnex|Skynxnex]] ([[User talk:Skynxnex|talk]]) 13:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

:I'm going to go ahead and open this discussion to a wider audience. Unless "major" is based on some precise measurement, then there's no use for the template. It's just plain nebulous, and thus not encyclopedic. We would just go in circles with the discussion as it stands here. &mdash; [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">Stevie is the man!</span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Contrib</span>]]} 22:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

:::::I am aware that Google's Dart is older and more notable than 2021 eTS (extended TypeScript)/now called ArkTS and recent 2024 Cangjie (after rumours of such in-house language since 2020). [[User:Poppodoms|Poppodoms]] ([[User talk:Poppodoms|talk]]) 13:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

::::::Dart is from 2011 [[User:Poppodoms|Poppodoms]] ([[User talk:Poppodoms|talk]]) 13:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

:::On the list of programming languages, yes it will be appropriate to add ArkTS and Cangjie on that link itself. [[User:Poppodoms|Poppodoms]] ([[User talk:Poppodoms|talk]]) 12:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

:I've removed them again per [[WP:BRD]], the discussion above, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard&oldid=1234492060#User:Poppodoms the COIN discussion]. I think affirmative consensus should be needed to re-add these to languages going forward. [[User:Skynxnex|Skynxnex]] ([[User talk:Skynxnex|talk]]) 18:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)