Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mojo (programming language)
Appearance
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Mojo (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Programming language, with no serious claims to notability. Was sent to draft by NPP, banged back into mainspace with the claim of multiple RS. I don't see them here and WP:BEFORE shows no record of enduring influence or prominence/notability as a language tool. And the article's promotional, to boot. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology, Computing, and Software. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- Week delete. InfoWorld seems fine. Others do not seem to be independent. Definitely has the feel of a promotional article, too. —siroχo 14:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. The sources are in the front: 2 infoworld, the register, and analytics india magazine. As far as I can tell they are all independent, reliable, and cover the language in depth, as required for WP:GNG. The fact that infoworld wrote about it again shows there is also WP:SUSTAINED coverage. There is more coverage too, they're just blogs and stuff that's not really reliable. But what is there seems sufficient, and I'm sure if something interesting happens, e.g. it goes out of beta, there will be another round of news coverage, allowing improvements in the article's tone and quality to make it less hype-y. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 17:57, 6 July 2023 (UTC)