Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supernova (programming language): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:17, 17 November 2013

Latest revision as of 13:35, 8 February 2022

Line 19:

*'''Delete.''' Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by [[WP:GNG]]. Sources offered are all [[WP:Primary]] (meaning, sources written by the author) or otherwise unsuitable. Googling turns up nothing useful. It's possible this is simply a case of [[WP:Too soon]] and that new, more helpful sources could appear tomorrow. But, frankly, I doubt it. It's very difficult to imagine this going anywhere. I don't know who would use it to do what. [[WP:COI]] is not a reason to delete but is a reason to question [[User:Msfclipper|Msfclipper]]'s impartiality in claiming this language is known for anything or even that it's known at all. If, as I expect, the consensus is to delete, [[User:Msfclipper|Msfclipper]] should request the article be ''[[WP:Userfy|userfied]]'' if he'd like to continue working on it as he looks for more suitable sources. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 17:15, 17 November 2013 (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>