Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bon (programming language)

Bon (programming language)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article consists of two factoids from a single source that only contains passing mention of the article's topic. This is all that any one of us has been able to find out about this programming language Bon since 2004. I conclude that the topic is not notable and suggest redirecting to either B (programming language) or Ken Thompson. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 05:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A very minor language that no-one is advocating for further use. However as it forms part of Ken Thompson's work and thus the predecessor history of C, it's significant in a historical sense. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- That's invoking WP:INHERIT. I haven't seen proof of the significance of the language. Ritchie in fact calls it "unrelated" to B and C.^{[citation needed]} QVVERTYVS (hm?) 09:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's a rather pathetic Summoning Of The Mighty Allcaps, even though such is only to be expected at AfD. An article on Woofles, Ken Thompson's pet dog is INHERITed. A language that formed part of Thompson's corpus of work is notable because of its place in the corpus, not because it's coincidentally linked to Thompson. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - No, this is a correct invocation of a guideline. What do we know about this language, other than that Thompson designed it, wrote an unpublished memo about it, and then moved on to other projects? What makes it deserve a Wikipedia article, despite there being no sources to attest to its significance? QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:18, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]