Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PureScript (programming language)
- PureScript (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)
Topic has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, so it fails GNG. —cnzx 23:52, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- The search links are skewed: with just "PureScript" they give much more hits and few of them refer to unrelated topic, if any.
- For programming languages, the following is a significant channel of coverage, not NYT nor mainstream news portals (by the time a language reaches them, it's usually old, stale and technologically obsolete): https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/purescript
- Also, scientific papers about a cutting edge programming language tend to be in preparation or on the level of BSc or MSc theses, as opposed to established programming languages, where there is a lot of misleading hits, because then the language is used as a basis for extensions, experiments, or just as a minor tool, so the papers are not really about such a language.
- I propose to wait and see, for otherwise, we risk a deletion/creation loop, with more and more arguments against deletion each time, but with less and less people willing to waste time creating the ephemeral article, even once the topic is very notable at some point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikon (talk • contribs) 01:36, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree that the search is skewed. Try searching with "PureScript" + programming (scholar, books). I don't work on PureScript, but I do hear its name often enough. For sources independent of the subject, see /r/purescript links. The first that came up was 'Purescript-web3 presentation by Martin Allen, Senior Blockchain Developer at FOAM' likely based on the ny-purescript meetup. If people are meeting up to talk about the language, isn't it notable enough? For a more academic sounding source, see 'Reactive Programming in the Browser with Scala.js and PureScript'. As far as I can tell, none of these people are directly affiliated with the PureScript project. Another reason one might consider it a relevant programming language is that it's mentioned as a AltJS language in job descriptions like this one. --Eed3si9n (talk) 02:02, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
keep
When this language added to the article (Timeline of programming languages), I deleted it at first because no article about the language!
Later I discovered that it deserve it's article (IMHO) using Wikipedia Guidelines.
So I started the language article, I don't know anything about the language, The team behind it, Never used it, I'm just writing for sharing the knowledge using the Internet resources.
(1) open source language with over 100 contributors and 4000 stars (Github)
https://github.com/purescript/purescript https://github.com/purescript/purescript/graphs/contributors
How many programmers in the world?
How many languages are used by very large number of developers?
Thousands of users for new programming languages (developed during the last 10 years) are enough!
(2) Used by many open source projects
https://github.com/trending/purescript
(3) Selected by GitHub team in (A list of programming languages that are actively developed on GitHub)
https://github.com/collections/programming-languages
(4) Provided as Haskell package too, Over 50,000 downloads from this website only
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/purescript
(5) Reference (Primary Resources): https://leanpub.com/purescript/
(6) Secondary Resources exists too
(7) The article is a (Stub), Just keep it so new resources can be added along the time. Magedsaud53 (talk) 02:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Happy holidays! Babymissfortune 02:26, 21 December 2017 (UTC)