Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meadow (programming)

Meadow (programming)

contested prod. Reasons provided ere "non notable software, vandalized for a month" -- Drini 04:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non-notable. "with ADvantages Over Windows" hardly makes it unique. Dlyons493 Talk 11:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As Vegaswikian says, at best a Merge into the language article. I've no objection to that being done. Dlyons493 Talk 16:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep A Google search for "Meadow" and "emacs" seems to indicate that it is quite popular among Japenese Windows users. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 20:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted for further consensus Computerjoe's talk 11:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• weak keep per Ohnoitsjamie or merge into Emacs J\/\/estbrook Talk VSCA  16:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep Disk space is cheap, human effort isn't. No real reason to delete it, and well, almost all open source projects start small. Bryce 22:10, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the main Emacs article and add a one-line mention about this port in there. The article is really devoid of real information anyway. -- Hirudo 14:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete. This is a project to port a language, based on the article. At best this is a Merge into the language article. Vegaswikian 19:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • <nitpick> It's a port of an editor, not a language </nitpick> -- Hirudo 19:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD is being relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!
Prodego ^talk 15:45, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's not just a port. What Meadows achieves is to extend the capabilities of emacs to make it suitable for use in complicated linguistic environments, such as the Japanese writing system, in which a literate user needs to be able to freely combine Kanji with two syllabaries: Hiragana and Katakana. --Lambiam^Talk 16:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Whether or not its useful doesn't matter in my opinion as far as WP-ness. However, there is no verifiable info/sources or any claims of the usage of such an application (eg. do a lot of people use it?). Not every piece of potentially useful software gets its own article. Wickethewok 20:56, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]