Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y (programming language)
- Y (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)
This language fails to meet the general notability guideline. The one source I could find was the author's original publication on the language in '81, which according to the ACM digital library has 10 citations. For a paper from 30 years ago, 10 citations is an awfully low number, so I don't think one could use an academic argument for this source establishing notability. Regardless, one source doesn't count as multiple instances of independent coverage. Christopher Monsanto (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Keep because nothing good ever came of a deletion spree. Ubernostrum (talk) 03:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Keep, deleting information en masse is never a good idea. If the article really shouldn't be here, I'm sure someone else will nom it. CM should probably chill out on the spree. Throwaway85 (talk) 05:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Keep, esp. as it relates to peephole optimization, and has a historical context within that purpose. It would make sense to incorporate it within the peephole optimization article with a redirect leading to that, but I do not have the time to do the editing atm. Until someone does, it should be a keep. Nodekeeper (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2011 (UTC)