Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sapir–Whorf and programming languages: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
ElectricRay (talk | contribs) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''delete'''. \ [[User:Backslash Forwardslash|Backslash Forwardslash]] / {[[User Talk: Backslash Forwardslash|talk]]} 05:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
===[[Sapir–Whorf and programming languages]]===
:{{la|Sapir–Whorf and programming languages}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Sapir–Whorf and programming languages|wpReason={{urlencode: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sapir–Whorf and programming languages]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sapir–Whorf and programming languages|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009
The article is pretty obviously original research, and wrong-headed research at that: The [[Sapir-Whorf]] hypothesis deals with the interpretation and intentionality of speech acts by entities (humans) who have a capacity for discretionary interpretation. This has nothing whatsoever to do with computer programming languages, since computers cannot be intentional, and their languages can't be subject to multiple interpretations or metaphors,and the ability of a programmer versed in one language to programme in another has nothing to do with Sapir Whorf at all. The article cites two references, one of which is a blog (ie non-notable) and the other makes no mention of Sapir whorf at all. [[User:ElectricRay|ElectricRay]] ([[User talk:ElectricRay|talk]]) 17:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
:I think your first argument misses the point. "Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute" (source: [[Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs|SICP]]). You state that "the ability of a programmer versed in one language to programme in another has nothing to do with Sapir Whorf at all" - Programmers' way of thinking about problems '''is''' formed by their programming languages, and you will find it difficult to explain the concept of [[Closure (computer science)|closures]] or [[Monad (functional programming)|monads]] to a pure C programmer (not to bash C programmers). --<b>[[User:V.R.S.|...- .-. ...]] / [[User talk:V.R.S.|-.. .. ... -.-]]</b> 19:17, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[User:TexasAndroid|TexasAndroid]] ([[User talk:TexasAndroid|talk]]) 00:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)</small>
<hr style="width:50%;" />
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 00:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->
*'''Delete''' This is an essay. It just does not have the references to justify an article. Not every idea someone has needs to be enshrined as an encyclopedia article. We should not be debating here whether it is ''true,'' but whether the idea has had significant coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources. There may be some truth in it: a programmer who started with flow charts and Fortran will approach an algorithm differently from one who started with object oriented programming and the prohibition of goto statements. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 16:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
*'''Trim significantly and merge as section into [[Sapir–Whorf hypothesis]]''' A couple good external links, a couple decent ideas, but mostly [[WP:OR]]. --[[User:Cybercobra|Cybercobra]] ([[User talk:Cybercobra|talk]]) 23:21, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as [[WP:OR|original research]]. [[User:Eluchil404|Eluchil404]] ([[User talk:Eluchil404|talk]]) 23:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||