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

Revision as of 09:56, 3 July 2019

Revision as of 11:32, 3 July 2019

Line 333:

****** I did, references from the same publisher are counted as (one reference), So I picked only 3 references for PWCT and the same for Ring, and together they are the article topic (Ring and related projects (Supernova, PWCT)). The references that I picked are enough for notability, and we have more references in the table above (if we need). Thank you very much [[User:Charmk|Charmk]] ([[User talk:Charmk|talk]]) 07:56, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

******* Your five refs about Ring: Code Project accepts user submited content - not a RS; general reliability of youm7 was disputed above by Colin M and I share his feeling; BIMArabia seems to publish anything you throw at them, but I can´t base my judgement on Google translate. Certainly not stellar sourcing in your selection. I´m leaning to delete. [[User:Pavlor|Pavlor]] ([[User talk:Pavlor|talk]]) 08:27, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

******** Articles in CodeProject are reviewed articles, CodeProject Editors review each article before publication. [[User:Charmk|Charmk]] ([[User talk:Charmk|talk]]) 11:32, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

******** The Youm7 articles indicates that Ring and PWCT are related projects and this Wikipedia article cover both of them, Also there are 4 articles in Youm7 by 3 different authors in different years (2011, 2016, 2018), not only one author (<b>Ignoring these articles based on feelings is not fair</b>). The BIMArabia article is 3 pages (printed magazine), Also the other resources about PWCT like [https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1167344.pdf][https://computertotaal.nl/artikelen/apps-software/de-beste-freeware-tips-van-oktober-4/][http://doublesvsoop.sourceforge.net/al_allam_magazine_issue_number_116.pdf#page=26] are enough for notability. (And there are more resources in the table). [[User:Charmk|Charmk]] ([[User talk:Charmk|talk]]) 08:49, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

********* Your approach certainly is not helping. I will give you one last chance: Select one (ONLY ONE = 1) source about Ring (not anything else) you think is best (eg. magazine with editorial staff, respected publisher, independent on the article subject, broad coverage of the article subject). I will review this source and decide for myself. Note more than one reliable source are required to satisfy GNG, but one really good source is enough for me to reconsider my choice. Your turn. [[User:Pavlor|Pavlor]] ([[User talk:Pavlor|talk]]) 09:05, 3 July 2019 (UTC)