Talk:Immutable interface

Requested move

It has been proposed in this section that Immutable interface be renamed and moved to Immutable Interface.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

User:Grundlefleck/Immutable Interface → Immutable Interface — Initial version of page, which has no meaningful content yet. Grundlefleck (talk) 00:39, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Seems more like a how to then an actual encyclopedic article. Notability is not established. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support The informit article probably establishes notability; this is definitely a legit Java thing. (The mindprod article is not helpful, though.) I disagree with the "how to" argument: examples are very helpful to explain what the pattern is, wp:NOTHOWTO allows for examples that are "intended to inform rather than to instruct." The style here is not like a textbook with "leading questions," etc. The article discusses the advantages and disadvantages, alternatives, etc. Sure, it's not a final draft - it needs more, but I don't think we need to hold up the move. ErikHaugen (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

In regards to estabilishing notability for the article, I agree the mindprob source is not very helpful (though it does mention "Immutable Interface"). Hopefully it helps my case is that the reason I wrote the article was a link to an empty article for "Immutable Interface" in the article for "Immutable Object". I also followed this article in terms of examples of the pattern, as that page does, and don't agree there is a how to aspect to the article. Any other pointers would be appreciated. Grundlefleck (talk) 11:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grundlefleck, I suppose I was too harsh on the mindprod reference, I see item 4 does describe this pattern, although it doesn't call it "immutable interface." The redlink thing doesn't do much to help establish notability; the informit article goes a long way toward establishing notability, other articles like that would help more. The c2.com link doesn't really establish notability, since it's a wiki that anyone could add some design pattern to that they just made up one day. I'm not trying to downplay the significance of that particular wiki, or even suggest that you remove the link to it, I'm just saying that its contents are not immediately notable. I think the article is off to a good start; you have most of the patterny stuff that a lot of the pattern articles all have: example, description, advantages, related patterns, etc. You might add other encyclopedia-type stuff like the history of it, who first documented it, etc. Other examples of design pattern articles for inspiration: Category:Software_design_patterns. ErikHaugen (talk) 17:56, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question regarding the c2 wiki article and general citation rules. In this case, the wiki article is attributed to Nat Pryce, who I would consider a credible source, having co-authored a published book and having presented at "Software Craftsmanship". My question is, since it is a wiki, is there more to be done to establish authorship? If there is something formally published by Nat Pryce describing the Immutable Interface pattern, would that be enough to establish notability? Thanks for taking the time to reply. Grundlefleck (talk) 20:14, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"is there more to be done to establish authorship" - I don't know if there's any point in spending any energy on this; someone could just go edit that page heavily, then it wouldn't really be Pryce anymore anyway. Yeah - if Pryce published something formally, that would certainly help establish the notability of this subject; that might be good to link to if it exists. ErikHaugen (talk) 00:24, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, should I go ahead with the move and continue to establish further notability, or do I have to wait? Thanks. Grundlefleck (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, your request is still pending in the requested moves queue. There's quite a backlog there, unfortunately. I would just wait and if you are so inclined continue working on the article. Vegaswikian has a point that this is not as "encyclopedic" as it could be, but hopefully whoever closes this discussion will agree that whatever problems the article has shouldn't hold it back from being moved to the main namespace as you are requesting. ErikHaugen (talk) 18:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]