Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/PureScript

I'd like to reopen this discussion. It seems like PureScript is still around and kicking a year later. I see it mentioned in discussions, at conferences, and on Twitter, but when I google it, I don't find it on Wikipedia.

Bartosz (talk) 20:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this isn't some fringe language. PureScript has 350+ published libraries (https://pursuit.purescript.org/), had its own conference in 2015 and 2016 (https://github.com/purescript/purescript/wiki/PureScript-Conf-2015, http://lanyrd.com/2016/purescript/), a published book (https://leanpub.com/purescript/read) etc. Can I do anything to help?

John2292 (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recreating the page

I'm going to ask Phil Freeman, the creator of PureScript, to draft a new version of the page and restart the discussion.

Bartosz (talk) 20:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a useful language, so I too believe this page should exist. MartensJD (talk) 01:09, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PureScript is popular in the Tec domain, not in the Sci domain

The pro delection arguments were wrong ever since.

They complained about how PureScript has almost no references in SCIENTIFIC articles.

But PureScript is realy popular in the TECHNOLOGY field (5899 stars at github, 1330 weekly download at mpn, 2.1k members and daily new comments at reddit).

Consistently you must apply the same arguments on another less scientific programming languages too (e.g. PHP). There are almost no scientific article on PHP => delete PHP wikipedia article??