Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pure (programming language) (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Line 10:
:::Fair enough on the second, but as I do have full access to it and can confirm that's all it says. On the third, I'm still wary because its still written by the developed. I think it can work as a an ''additional'' source, but not the ''primary'' or ''only'' source. Lastly, I didn't nominate the article, and was not attempting to criticize you directly, but more of putting it on record so that someone doesn't quickly look at the discussion and not realize that the previous AfD wasn't as cut and dry as it appears on the surface. [[User talk:Ravendrop|Ravendrop]] 08:13, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Deletion sorting--></small> <small>-- [[User:Cybercobra|<b><font color="3773A5">Cyber</font></b><font color="FFB521">cobra</font>]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 03:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)</small>
*<s>'''Delete''' I see no independent, in-depth treatment of this language from [[WP:RS]]. Would be willing to change my vote if some is found.</s> '''Weak Keep''' Based solely on the German article and, minimally, on the refereed proceeding. [[User talk:Ravendrop|Ravendrop]] 07:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
**What beef do you have with the German article? --[[User:Cybercobra|<b><font color="3773A5">Cyber</font></b><font color="FFB521">cobra</font>]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 08:10, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
:::Can you, or someone else, verify that it is a [[WP:RS]]. [[User talk:Ravendrop|Ravendrop]] 04:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
| |||