Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Randykitty (talk | contribs) Closing debate, result was delete |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 25:
:::(Note that the following is a wild guess:) I think I know why, besides the licensing, Qi and Shen have been entirely uninfluential, thereby failing to achieve Wikipedia notability: there's little that's qualitatively unique about them except for implementation details. They are explicitly intended to be modern functional languages, adding a number of features where Lisp hasn't kept up in any base version of the language. And Shen's KL is akin to the [[SECD machine]]. [[User:Hga|Hga]] ([[User talk:Hga|talk]]) 12:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Northamerica1000|N<
*'''Comment.''' Here's the problem I have with the argument that the work represents "an important step in language development". No one's argued anyone's using Qi or Shen and the author, Mark Tarver, is an academic, so I'm inclined to test the claim of importance in the way we often do in academia, which is to ask how often the work has been cited. [https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=author%3A%22mark+tarver%22&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48 Here's] a Google scholar search on Tarver's papers. His paper on Qi has received only 3 citations and his paper on Shen has received only 2. Drilling down, three of those combined 5 citations are by Tarver himself, leaving these papers with ''only one citation each'' by anyone other than the author. Within the STEM disciplines, a significant paper is generally understood to be one that receives over 1000 citations. Qi and Shen are not only not important, almost no one's even noticed they exist. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 20:08, 28 February 2015 (UTC).
Line 52:
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF4F00;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.}}'''</span><br />
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Nakon|<
:I should introduce myself; I am Dr Willi Riha, formerly lecturer in comparative programming languages at the university of Leeds.
Line 121:
:::: Understood, thanks. [[User:Tiodante|Tiodante]] ([[User talk:Tiodante|talk]]) 22:18, 11 March 2015 (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 [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||