Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fp code: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Line 8:
*'''Delete''' Hey Pyenos. It is obvious that you have put a LOT of work into that article, however Wikipedia has a policiy on not listing original research (as it is an encyclopaedia, so it has to go with commonly accepted facts). However, if you are able to show real-world/practical applications of Fp code and its advantages/disadvantages to other programming languages, I would be happy to change my vote. It is, however, important that articles in Wikipedia are on notable things so that it does become a research source. I hope you don't get discouraged by all of this, as I'm sure you would be able to contribute to a lot of other articles out there.</b>cheers, [[User:Dr.alf|alf]] 11:04, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
*'''Delete all.''' OR. [[User:Dottoreso|Dottore So]] 11:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
*'''Weak Delete''': it's only original research because the author has yet to publish it elsewhere, but it ''is'' original. Also '''slapped wrist''' to RHaworth for tagging it ''nonsense'': it is not [[Wikipedia:Patent nonsense|patent nonsense]]. - [[User:Mholland|mholland]] 12:41, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
| |||