Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ATP (programming language)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mark Arsten (talk | contribs) at 13:32, 24 October 2012 (Closing debate, 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 13:32, 24 October 2012 by Mark Arsten (talk | contribs) (Closing debate, 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 13:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- ATP (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not finding any reference to this online. I believe it fails inclusion guidelines. If anyone has a conflicting policy or a source to show me differently I think this should be deleted. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unsourced, no evidence of notability. Fails WP:COI and WP:MADEUP. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:43, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The article admits that this doesn't even exist yet (and, considering that this purports to be platform-independent object-oriented natural language programming, almost surely won't ever exist). Fails WP:MADEUP and/or WP:CRYSTAL, and would be a candidate for A7 speedy deletion except software is explicitly exempt from that criterion. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:56, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. No indication of why this subject should be notable. Appears to be completely WP:MADEUP. Msnicki (talk) 16:31, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I was actually going to A7 this after waiting a few minutes. Never got around to this. WP:SNOW? ⁓ Hello71 21:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Per the article itself, the language does not exist, except perhaps as a development project, nor are there any users, nor are there any references. Rwessel (talk) 02:14, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Language at development stage; can't find references, searching on the net. Churn and change (talk) 03:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The article claims that the subject is in development and has yet to be released, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.--xanchester (t) 09:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:SNOW delete. No sources found, doesn't exist, fails WP:GNG, WP:NSOFT etc. --Batard0 (talk) 12:47, 24 October 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.