Content deleted Content added
Jonovision (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
Line 158:
== Is Go! a 'little known' language? ==
The article previously introduced Go! as a 'little known language' with a citation from an obscure to me blog or e-zine.
I do not know whether Go is little known or not. The provided source does not provide enough evidence to establish the fact.
Line 174 ⟶ 173:
:I've reverted the change and put that text back in. I don't see any reason to question the motives or accuracy of the cited author, especially since his article is generally favourable towards the language. Anyways, even if it were biased, Wikipedia's policy doesn't say that articles can't express a point of view, just that opposing points of view should also be included. --[[User:Jonovision|Jonovision]] ([[User talk:Jonovision|talk]]) 12:46, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
:'''Now''' the language is much more known than before, and I thank Google for that. Google's language seems to be the most unnecessary one since the emergence of Java reintroducing a lot of PL lacks, but I really need to evaluate agent languages. If Google didn't decide to make a troll (by violating the bourgeoisi principle and thereby the capitalist system) I would never have known about Go!. ... said: [[User:Rursus|Rursus]] ([[User talk:Rursus|'''<span style="color: #CC0044; background: #CCFF88"><sup>m</sup><u>bork³</u></span>''']]) 14:47, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
| |||