Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green (programming language) (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. --MuZemike 04:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Green (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No evidence Green has been subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works in reliable independent sources as required to meet Wikipedia's criteria for WP:Notability. Most of the article was written by the language's creator. Published sources about the language appear to be primarily journal articles by the language creator (not independent and therefore insufficient to establish notability). Propose Delete. DGaw (talk) 02:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. No sources. No assertion of notability. --Legis (talk - contribs) 04:47, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment In the event of deletion, I request redirection to Ada (programming language) per the current article's hatnote. --Cybercobra (talk) 06:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - TP 03:07, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no evidence of notability within the article, weblink is currently dead and when it says:
  For the proposed language that was developed into Ada, see Ada (programming language) § History.
  surely that implies the Ada one is a different language. --Northernhenge (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.