Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Relisting debate |
No edit summary |
||
Line 40:
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF4F00;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.}}'''</span><br />
<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Nakon|<font color="#C50">'''Nakon'''</font>]] 05:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Shen (programming language)]]</div>
I should introduce myself; I am Dr Willi Riha, formerly lecturer in comparative programming languages at
the university of Leeds.
First I agree with you that the license question, which seems to be something of an obsession
with HGA, is a blind with respect to the question of notability raised on these pages. As a
matter of fact, Shen is under 3-clause BSD and has been since February this year.
I can say that Shen is not 'still born' (Dingley) or dead and that I have written and am still writing a
significant body of work in it; work that in some cases I could not have pursued in ML; an example being the construction of a type secure proof assistant based on Bourbaki's formalisation of PC. HGA's
characterisation of Shen as having 'little that's qualitatively unique' is malicious. We also have
a team of people working on implementations under half a dozen languages. Finally Greg Spurrier is writing
an introduction to Shen in Asciidoc. I am working on concurrent Shen right now. Shen is far from dead.
I am not an expert on the notability criteria of wikipedia or the question of primary sources. The Shen
group has relied heavily on Mark Tarver's written documentation which is excellent and very thorough.
So much so that it has deterred people from writing their own, though this is now changing. I know
that Mark has encouraged people to step out of his shadow, and I hope with the new license this will
happen. I would have thought that Aditya's talk on Shen at the StrangeLoop conference in 2014 should
have sufficed in itself to remove the question of notability.
WP:notability says
The term "published" is most commonly associated with text materials, either in traditional printed format or online. However, audio, video, and multimedia materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable sources.
As Mark has pointed out, there are articles in Wikipedia
on languages like Brainfuck and Malbolge which have far less following or use than Shen.
I think that there are enough people in the Shen group to rewrite this stub without Mark having to violate
Wikipedia guidelines by editing the article himself. I vote for a strong keep.
| |||