Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shen (programming language): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:32, 9 March 2015

Revision as of 16:15, 9 March 2015

Line 41:

:::::: From [[WP:RS]] it seems that video is fine as a published source "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." The question then becomes if Strange Loop and InfoQ are considered reliable sources.[[User:Yofsotsi|Yofsotsi]] ([[User talk:Yofsotsi|talk]]) 03:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

::::::: I think developer conferences like Strange Loop and InfoQ accept talk based purely on a submitted abstract, or by invitation based on past performance of the speaker. As such the have little to no control over the content and thus wouldn't rank as particularly reliable due to lack of any review. For establishing notability it's a start, but one or two conferences in total still doesn't meet the criteria (I'm pretty sure we don't have an article on the vast majority of topic discussed in one talk at a developer's conference.) —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 10:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

:::::::Yes, [[User:Yofsotsi|Yofsotsi]], a video can be acceptable. But what's contemplated is a video by a [[WP:RELIABLE]] source. A video segment from [[60 Minutes]] is one thing; CBS News stands behind those and while even they occasionally get things wrong, we can all agree they have a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control. A YouTube video, an obviously [[WP:Self-published source]] is quite another. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 16:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

<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 />

Line 64 ⟶ 66:

::''"HGA's characterisation of Shen as having 'little that's qualitatively unique'"'' is a ''wild guess'' signaled by the weasel words ''"I think I know why"'', working from the observed facts and trying to figure out why Qi/Shen have made ''no'' apparent impact on the programming languages community, which might be expected to use some of its ideas if they were unique. That guess has resulted in no reply other than insult, plus now the above observation that it can do things that [[Williriha]] cannot (easily) do in [[ML_(programming_language)|ML]]. If I'm wrong, I would be interested in specifics about qualitative things that make it unique beyond implementation details, like it being a Lisp. [[User:Hga|Hga]] ([[User talk:Hga|talk]]) 22:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

::Dr. Riha, as an academic, surely you understand what it means to publish. It doesn't mean posting on YouTube. It usually means you got your paper published in some kind of reviewed publication. Our standards aren't even that high. All we ask is that you got published in a source with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control. If you or anyone else is indeed doing some interesting work with Shen, surely some of you must have an incentive to publish something on the topic. Once you do, that will contribute to the notability of Shen in a way we can consider. When do you think that might happen? In the meantime, you are welcome to [[WP:USERFY]] the page. [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 16:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

* '''keep''' In the Lisp family of languages, Shen stands out in at least two respects: (1) Its type system, which is closer to a general theorem prover than to a traditional type system, and (2) its implementation by compilation to a minimalist subset of itself. Shen is actively developed, well documented in [http://www.shenlanguage.org/tbos.html The Book of Shen], and it has a small but active user base organized in a mailing list. Not being a Wikipedia expert, I cannot say if this suffices for notability, but as a Wikipedia user I would definitely expect Wikipedia to have an entry on Shen. <small>— [[User:82.66.102.10|82.66.102.10]] ([[User talk:82.66.102.10|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/82.66.102.10|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. </small> — <small>'''Note''': An editor has expressed a concern that [[User:82.66.102.10|82.66.102.10]] ([[User talk:82.66.102.10|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/82.66.102.10|contribs]]) has been [[WP:CANVAS|canvassed]] to this discussion. {{#if:|([{{{2}}} diff])|}}</small> <small>The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added at 08:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)</small>

::Again, the book is a [[WP:PRIMARY]] source, written by the author of this language and does not contribute to notability. If you would like to see an article about Shen here in WP, it's really, really simple: Go publish something somewhere else in a reliable source first, then come back and you'll get your article in a jiffy. Why is this so hard? [[User:Msnicki|Msnicki]] ([[User talk:Msnicki|talk]]) 16:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)