Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
Qi/Shen uninfluential because only implementation details are qualitatively unique |
||
Line 13:
:::A couple questions, Andy: Where are the reliable independent sources? Or in the alternative, what do you rely in the guidelines that supports notability without sources? Every one of the reasons you've given seems to be a reason why the article should be deleted, not kept. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 11:20, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
:::I think I know why, besides the licensing, Qi and Shen have been entirely uninfluential, thereby failing to achieve Wikipedia notability: there's little that's qualitatively unique about them except for implementation details. They are explicitly intended to be modern functional languages, adding a number of features where Lisp hasn't kept up in any base version of the language. And Shen's KL is akin to the [[SECD machine]]. [[User:Hga|Hga]] ([[User talk:Hga|talk]]) 12:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Northamerica1000|N<font size="-2">ORTH</font> A<font size="-2">MERICA</font>]]<sup><font size="-2">[[User_talk:Northamerica1000|1000]]</font></sup> 18:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)</small>
| |||