Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shakespeare programming language: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Changing my opinion from "Delete" to "Weak keep" |
Comment |
||
Line 14:
**The original AfD (this is a relisting following a Deletion Review) was based on notability and verifiability. This AfD doesn't have a nomination, it's a relist; saying 'Keep, no arguments given to delete' is fine, but this would mean that you considered the above variants of 'delete' invalid. --[[User:ais523|ais523]] 16:39, 4 October 2006 ([[User:ais523|U]][[User talk:ais523|T]][[Special:Contributions/Ais523|C]])
*'''Keep''' 153.25.87.34 makes a good point; it's unclear what policy this breaches. [[WP:N]] is an essay, and the Slashdotting seems to help with that; [[WP:V]] is policy, but the interpreters that are available and a listing on http://www.99-bottles-of-beer.net (which does its own checking) mean that there are probably enough sources available to write a verifiable article.
**'''Comment'''. As with the vast majority of AfDs, the point is that an article for a non-notable topic should have never been created as [[Wikipedia:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information|Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information]]. However, I have changed my opinion above from "delete" to "weak keep" as the coverage on Slashdot establishes enough notability in my eyes. —[[User:Tobias Bergemann|Tobias Bergemann]] 07:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
| |||