Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esoteric programming language related: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:09, 30 January 2022

Latest revision as of 17:59, 6 February 2023

Line 50:

* I second Angela's vote: '''keep or redirect all'''. To decide which ones to keep and which ones to merge/redirect into [[List of esoteric programming languages]], discuss it at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Programming Languages|WikiProject Programming Languages]], ''not'' here on VfD.<p>Side note about the mass listing: please don't ever do this again. I know you were trying to speed up the process, but the logistics of juggling 70+ subnominations has actually slowed down the process. (Never sacrifice sanity for speed!) If you want to delete an entire class of articles, start by discussing it at [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy]] and the [[Wikipedia:Village pump|village pump]]. Thanks, [[User:Benc|•&nbsp;Benc]][[User_talk:Benc|&nbsp;•]] 19:34, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

* Keep all of them, and make a policy to stop people doing this again. [[User:Intrigue|Intrigue]] 19:48, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

* '''Keep.''' No policies, though, that is absurd. He is not a troll for nominating these. &mdash; [[User:El Chico|<fontspan colorstyle="color:red;">El</fontspan> <fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">Chico!</fontspan>]] [[User talk:El Chico|^{<fontspan colorstyle="color:blue;">Talk</fontspan>}]] 20:15, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

* Keep these articles. [[User:The Recycling Troll|The Recycling Troll]] 20:18, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

*'''Keep'''. --[[User:Yath|Yath]] 20:35, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Line 72:

*'''''Keep all'''''. No need to delete knowledge. [[User:WhiteTimberwolf|WhiteTimberwolf]] 11:50, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

*'''''Comment''''': the google test mechanism employed to discredit the languages described in the articles seems fatally flawed. Almost invariably the test has been to search for "''name'' programming language". I wonder if this is likely to discount perfectly good hits simply on the grounds that this exact phrase does not occur. I might support replacing the '''''List''''' with a longer article containing more detailed descriptions of each language, but I suspect that the product would be less helpful than what we have now. I'm definitely inclining towards ''Keep'' unless I can be convinced otherwise. --[[User:Phil Boswell|Phil]] | [[User talk:Phil Boswell|Talk]] 12:05, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)

*'''Keep All''' ''esoteric'' does not mean ''unknown''. There is a great deal of interest in these languages among CS people. The Google results are flawed and so meaningless. Too much attention is paid to them anyway. Also, the nominator voted Keep for some entries, undercutting his own argument [[User:Thesteve|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#FFFFFF;">The Steve</fontspan>]] 13:07, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)

*'''Keep All''' The esoteric programming languages have relevance in terms of experimental computer science -- for one thing, most are simple Turing Machines. While they might not be generally useful, they do have their uses, and they're interesting to read about. Considering the number of votes in support of the esoteric languages, I'm suprised the boilerplates are still up....

*Comment: a lot of people are casting blanket "keep" votes despite the fact that some of these "languages" have, by their articles' own admission, never existed outside of one humorous USENET post. I suggest that, after the five-day voting period for this mass nomination ends, any articles that have received a simple majority of non-"keep" votes cast specifically for them be re-nominated, so that we can reach a genuine consensus on whether they deserve inclusion. [[User:Triskaideka|<nowiki></nowiki>]]&mdash;[[User:Triskaideka|Triskaideka]] 15:56, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Line 88:

**Done. -- [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 10:34, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

***Thanks, Chris [[User:Leif|<nowiki></nowiki>]]<tt>'''~'''[[User:Leif|leif]]</tt> &#9786; [[User_talk:Leif|_HELO]] 21:01, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

*'''Keep all''' - The mass nomination is wrong. If you can't be bothered to evaluate them individually then they don't belong here. If you have then discuss them individually instead of lumping them in a group where the good can be thrown out with the bad (if any). - [[User:Texture|<fontspan colorstyle="color:red;">Tεx</fontspan>]][[User Talk:Texture|<fontspan colorstyle="color:blue;">τ</fontspan>]][[User:Texture|<fontspan colorstyle="color:red;">urε</fontspan><!-- TANSTAAFL -->]] 20:38, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

*Comment: several voters are giving [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] a hard time for mass-nominating a large number of articles. In fact, he's one of a very few people who ''did'' evaluate all of the articles individually. He voted on every one and provided at least a short reason. This only ''looks'' like a blanket nomination because he nominated them all at the same time and allowed people to vote on them all as a group&mdash;which I think is turning out to have been a mistake, as some of these subjects are, IMO, clearly more notable than others. It might have been easier on the voters if he'd nominated them in batches over a longer period (although then I'm sure people would have cited the languages that hadn't yet been deleted as support for the languages up for consideration), but I think it's unfair to criticize him for being willing to do ''more'' work than anyone else. If articles deserve to be nominated, then they deserve to be nominated, and many of these clearly deserve at least nomination, even if we ultimately decide that they don't deserve deletion. [[User:Triskaideka|<nowiki></nowiki>]]&mdash;[[User:Triskaideka|Triskaideka]] 21:13, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

**('''Comment & Apoligies by Nominator''') Thank you very much. I agree that it was a mistake to nominate such a large nuber at once, including some clear ''Keep''er's .I would like to thank everybody who looked at the individual nominations for their effort. My apologies to the community for creating such a stir. On top of that, I have to go on a trip today and won't be back until Thursday, so I can't even clean up my mess when it is due on Monday. (Not that I would delete anything at this point with that number of ''Keep all'' votes). Otherwise i would remove all the ''VfD'' tags from the articles and also see which articles had a majority for deletion based on the individual votes. Again - not deleting them but only list them somewhere (possibly [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Programming Languages]]) and ask for further comment. After that I probably take a VfD Holiday. Thanks. -- [[User:Chris 73|Chris 73]] [[User talk:Chris 73|Talk]] 23:13, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)