Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pollen (programming language)

Pollen (programming language)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Absolutely no proof of notability, created by a COI editor ~ Eejit43 (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable programming language. Additionally, per the article creator's user page, they've stated they are the creator of this programming language. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Two included sources do not prove WP:GNG as one is Github (generally unreliable unless stated as per local consensus) and the other is not independent one (both fail per WP:RS, first one per WP:SPS). A09 (talk) 15:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I considered nominating this when I left the COI template on the creator's userpage, but was about to go to bed and didn't have time for WP:BEFORE and then kind of forgot about the whole thing. Looking around now, I see nothing to suggest notability.

n.b. There is also another language called Pollen that is not this one. I don't think that one's notable either, but it's certainly more notable than the one being discussed here. ℰmi1y_⧼T·C⧽ 18:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I have discussed my reasons to keep the article on my talk page but I've been continuously attacked by Eejit43 and Emily. I believe the quality of the page is good enough for a stub and other Wikipedia users need to have a chance to discover this article to read and contribute to it. Additionaly, I believe they might have a connection with the author of the "Pollen" macro system that Emily specified and linked to (the pollen in this article is about a general purpose programming language). The project has been receiving vandalism, pishing and false reports. They also don't seem to have any deep understanding of the Pollen programming language, as they specified they never heard of it (and maybe is one of the reasons they want to delete the article). They also don't seem to have enough knowledge about systems programming languages to even use Pollen. M4t3uz (talk) 01:14, 21 March 2023 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: M4t3uz (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

M4t3uz, having seen hundreds of AFD discussions, this article is highly unlikely to be Kept since you are the only vocal supporter of this opinion. You'd have better luck asking for the article to be "Draftified" and moved to Draft space so you could continue to work on it and improve it. Once it is deleted, it is gone. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it fails WP:GNG. Then I would consider salting due to the above comments from the article's creator.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: clearly non-notable topic. As such it should not be moved to draft or userspace, especially with the COI concerns. If it becomes notable in the future, they can create a draft at that point. ––FormalDude (talk) 06:04, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]