Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Formula One (programming language): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Formula One (programming language): changed to delete |
Andy Dingley (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 12:
**Per [[WP:R#PLA]] we should not redirect to an article unless the redirected term is mentioned on the target article in a prominent way. That is not the case now, and merging the content to there may give this [[WP:UNDUE]] weight – no other constraint logic PLs are mentioned there. In spite of the positive review in ''BYTE'' we also have no article on Trilogy (I haven't read the ''BYTE'' review, but I assume this is about the language and system developed by Paul J. Voda). --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 22:38, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
**Yes, I should have re-read [[WP:R#PLA]]. Changed to '''delete'''. --[[User:Northernhenge|Northernhenge]] ([[User talk:Northernhenge|talk]]) 09:59, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
** It's a long time since I wrote any Trilogy, but this doesn't look much like its syntax. F1 looks like a far more practical approach to a similar problem. So we shouldn't redirect to Trilogy.
:: However that's not what was suggested - a merge to [[Constraint logic programming]] seems entirely appropriate. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 11:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
* '''Merge''' (although I'd prefer to '''keep''' it) No, I can't source it immediately. Like msnicki's other AfD for [[Qi (programming language)]], these are articles that illustrate why language designers need to choose [[googlewhack]]s for their names, if they're to survive on WP. This is a good article and is illustrative of the general field of [[Constraint logic programming]]. Accordingly if we aren't going to keep it for reasons of demonstrated notability, we should at least improve the encyclopedia by merging this useful topic explanation into our general article. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 11:33, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
| |||