Template:Did you know nominations/WSFN (programming language)


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

WSFN (programming language)
...? Source: entire Dr. Dobbs article
 * ... that after writing Tiny BASIC, Li-Chen Wang wrote WSFN to control robots?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Bill Dubuque

5x expanded by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 13:45, 27 April 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Article is new enough (recent 5x expansion), long enough, and neutral, but referencing needs work. Reference #1 is a dead link. The info in the lead about extended WSFN lacks references and is not mentioned in article body. The hook is mildly interesting, but I can't find a source that says Wang created Tiny Basic. IMO what the acronym stands for (Nothing) would be a far more interesting hook, if a source could be found (other than the dead link). -Zanhe (talk) 23:50, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you respond to the above comment so that this nomination can proceed? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:31, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

I totally forgot about this. Withdrawn nom. Maury Markowitz (talk) 10:24, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg	 Would you really wish to withdraw this nomination? The article and hook have potential and the only thing that seems to be problematic is the source for the abbreviation, which is a resolvable issue. It would be a real shame for this nomination not to pass given how interesting the acronym is. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Uhhh, OK, just busy with other articles. Lets just do this:
 * ALT1: * ...that Li-Chen Wang wrote WSFN to control robots, naming it "Which Stands for Nothing"?


 * Symbol possible vote.svg ALT1 seems acceptable and I would be ready to approve it. With that said, I'm concerned about the fact that the article only has two sources, both of which are not independent. The article lacks coverage from independent sources such as reviews or third-party discussions. A search doesn't show much either, though it could be that most coverage is offline considering the language's age. As such, I'm sure if the topic meets the notability guidelines.  Courtesy ping  Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I knew that was going to happen. Narutolovehinata5, I don't have time for 20 questions, make up your mind and pull the trigger one way or the other. Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll wait for replies from Zanhe and Cwmhiraeth first. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:42, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * DYK is meant to be for newly created or expanded articles and I don't like to see all sorts of hurdles erected to make it more difficult for nominations to proceed. Notability is not a criterion for DYK and the referencing seems adequate to me. If you think the subject non-notable you can nominate the article at AfD, but if you don't want to do that, I should forget about notability. Nitpicking is also a deterrent for article creators and they go away and stop nominating their articles for DYK. I can think of several editors who have done that. So I think this article should be approved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:21, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd love to see this article appear on the main page, especially with the highly hooky ALT1. However, the simple fact is that it's not currently supported with a verifiable source. (It had a deadlink reference, which has since been removed.) -Zanhe (talk) 18:35, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Scratch that. I've found an old book reference for the acronym and added it to the article. To increase hookiness, I propose ALT2:
 * ALT2: ... that WSFN, Which Stands For Nothing, was created to control robots?  -Zanhe (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Given the language's age, I think we need to give some leeway on coverage here, as it's quite likely that much of the coverage would be in old offline sources. With that said, as I can't access Zanhe's new source, I'm accepting the source in good faith and approving ALT2. As an aside, I've been thinking that ALT2 could be rephrased in such a way that it could make a good April Fools' hook. Thoughts? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * For April Fools Day, I would propose something wackier, such as


 * ALT3: ... that a thing which stands for nothing was created to control robots?
 * Of course, I'd respect the opinion of wrt whether he wants to wait until next year for the DYK to be featured. -Zanhe (talk) 20:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with that, but I suspect there's a lot of other articles that would end up in front of this one competing for that slot. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)