:Also, the fact that both of the references provided on the page state that only Fortran is older than Lisp should be taken into account. These are references from people who were around at the time, and it isn't as if COBOL is something they would have been unaware of.
The first paragraph in the "History" section is written as if McCarthy was the sole author of lisp. However, the cited paper contains this in the "acknowledgements" section:
{{blockquote|text=The Lisp programming system was developed by a group including R. Brayton, D. Edwards, P. Fox, L. Hodes, D. Luckham, K. MMing, J. McCarthy , D. Park, S. Russell.}}
So it sounds to me like McCarthy is the one who wrote the paper, which is valuable labor, but different than the development of lisp. Is there a reason not to acknowledge this explicitly in the article? [[User:Skyvine|skyvine ]] ([[User talk:Skyvine|talk]]) 13:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
:Added some additional information from McCarthy's chapter in "History of Programming Languages". It sounds like McCarthy was principally responsible for the design, but was supported by colleagues (which sounds typical). I put the citation with McCarthy as the principle author and Wexelblat as the secondary author but I'm not sure that's right. McCarthy wrote the chapter but Wexelblat appears on the cover because he edited the book (each chapter is written by an author who could be considered a primary source on the history of the language). But I don't see an "editor" field in the citation template so a secondary author seems like the best fit. [[User:Skyvine|skyvine ]] ([[User talk:Skyvine|talk]]) 12:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
