Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Shen (programming language): + drilling down into the citations |
|||
Line 15:
:<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<font size="-2">ORTH</font> A<font size="-2">MERICA</font>]]<sup><font size="-2">[[User_talk:Northamerica1000|1000]]</font></sup> 18:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)</small>
*'''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)
| |||