Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abel (programming language)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Michig (talk | contribs) at 21:06, 8 January 2012 (Closing AfD, result was delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 21:06, 8 January 2012 by Michig (talk | contribs) (Closing AfD, result was delete)
- 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. Michig (talk) 21:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Abel (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)
All that I can find for this programming language in searches is this article. Fails WP:N. SL93 (talk) 20:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete - A7, no claim of notability. Kuguar03 (talk) 23:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. It certainly existed; see here. But I can't find enough citations of this or the related papers on the project to convince me of its lasting significance. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Played a minor role in the history of bounded quantification. See Benjamin C. Pierce, "Bounded quantification is undecidable", POPL '92. Probably deserves a (short) mentioning there. —Ruud 04:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete per Kuguar03. —Tim Pierce (talk) 03:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- comment A7 is "A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content)." and does not apply to this kind of articles. Christian75 (talk) 21:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - N significant coverage in reliable sources. It appears to have been part of some research project within HP. [1]. -- Whpq (talk) 17:31, 5 January 2012 (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.