Talk:Higher-Order Perl

Untitled section
Does anyone know whether HOP will ever actually be made available online? The page saying that it'll be coming eventually was last updated in 2005, and the sign-up for the hop-volunteer mailing list doesn't work for me. JadeNB (talk) 16:50, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I´m wondering the same thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.146.102.47 (talk) 15:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It is now available. I have updated the main page with a link.  JadeNB (talk) 21:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
I would like to dispute the "conflict of interest" tag that was recently added. I am well aware of the potential for a conflict of interest here, and I have tried to take care not to make any objectionable changes. A look at my changes to this article will reveal that I am not a "major contributor" to the article. My changes were all extremely minor and, I think, inarguable. For example, I corrected the spelling of the title of the book and I linked some of the items in the chapter listing to the relevant Wikipedia articles. Aside from adding an infobox, I made only one significant change: I removed a link to my web site that did not seem relevant; I think this should demonstrate my good faith. —Mark Dominus (talk) 14:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Notability
A user recently added a template that asserts that this subject may not be notable under the General Notability Guidelines. Whether or not that is true, I believe it is the wrong standard to use. The correct standard is the specific guideline for notability of books. —Mark Dominus (talk) 14:13, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Self Promoting Advertisement
This article is about a non-notable book and a non-notable author and is presented as a book advertisement. All of its sources are self-published with an interesting slight of hand by funneling them through advertisement programs from linux open source publications but it doesn;t pass the smell test. The Advertisement in China is a great example of this. Would recommend this article for better sources, and absent that, Afd. It's clearly a puffery piece. 166.70.60.63 (talk) 04:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)