Content deleted Content added
m →Define "major": yet another stab even though I'm not "anybody else"... |
StefenTower (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 62:
:::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<sub>users</sub>-wise) significant? --[[User:Wernher|Wernher]] 11:04, 1 Feb 2005 (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. — [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">Stevie is the man!</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|<span style="color:blue">Contrib</span>]]</sup> 22:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
| |||