Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arendelle (programming language)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Randykitty (talk) 11:24, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Arendelle (programming language)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:NSOFT or WP:GNG. Article cites no third-party sources, nor can I find any using DuckDuckGo, GScholar or GBooks. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 19:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * There is nothing to write in here I guess. Recently I was in a school and a friend of mine was teaching kids programming with Arendelle. I remember they were motivated by their teachers that if you code good maybe your year photo goes to Wikipedia. I understand your concerns. Well Arendelle is a tool used in some schools and universities here in Iran. Some stuff like flowgorithm or the book Create your own programming language... likes it (if you know about computing you sure know about CoffeeScript or maybe Fancy they are both featured in the book as well as Arendelle. And at least Coffee is one of the most important languages around. And honestly I bet if you search web you don't find anything. Really do a search, search "Fancy Language" and only thing you find is this link: http://rubini.us/2011/02/23/introduction-to-fancy/ but that doesn't mean it's cheap. It's worthless or something. I know many people who code in Fancy. Fancy is in GitHub's official languages and it is RosettaCode. For a language you really need nothing more than having one of these to say it's popular. But I remember I tried to fix the book (https://www.gitbook.com/book/kary/infancy/details) as there was nothing to read about and for god's sake review their references) and it Arendelle there are books, a hell lots of compilers and interpreters (even most of the coolest languages have one, there are 3 for Arendelle. nothing not well known reaches this) and there are so many stuff written for Arendelle that even the most famous ones don't. I may be emotional about Arendelle because I'm a part of the project but seriously if you know or knew anything about languages you could never find it "not notable". I'm sad that the page is going to be lost because I've seen people getting to excited about it. For our not well know community it was such a confidence and now that it is going to be done I feel we may even face serious consequences and well maybe those kiddos never find themselves in Wikipedia.


 * P.S[ 1 ]: References for Arendelle are the best. Because they are "Official References" for it. A language is not something you do blogs, press and books for it's features or stuff. A language is a "standard" and you have to check the official standard reference for it. Arendelle's features are written on standard formats is it's book, it's website, and most importantly it's source code. If I write a blog or CNET do it, non of them are even reliable for understanding Arendelle. And well if you just check the article there is nothing as "OMG Arendelle is soooooo coool!! it has this or that, just 34.34$" even Apple page has that but if you just check Arendelle's page you see nothing but some technical details about Arendelle. I'm sure people who wrote the document and me are all Arendelle super fans, but honestly, it's one of the most impartially written Wiki pages, I don't see even see adjectives but stuff like domain-specific which are language attributes. So I think for that matter the references are not just fine, but the best possible. (For just a sec, Imagine there is this giant page about an ISO standard, and the references are press and media... I have nothing more to say). just once try Arendelle or something else and after you know programming you will never say that the references are bad.


 * P.S[ 2 ]: I don't know if you ever had people who look up to you. But here there are. And after Arendelle being destroyed they will all just think "What they do is not important" and well next time I see them I can tell that well that something as trying so hard to be able to expose nudity is important but well what you do is exactly marked "meaningless" and "not notable". Honestly I didn't even care about a page like this on the web. But well I wrote all this because I just started thinking that was the most offensive way to call something or someone "not notable", at least change the name or something.


 * Karux (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I love Arendelle. It's just sad --Thechosendragon (talk) 21:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC) — Thechosendragon (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Thanks for your support! very kind of you
 * Karux (talk) 21:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I care about Arendelle and I don't think it should be removed ~  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.9.127.206 (talk) 21:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)  — 85.9.127.206 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Thanks for your support! very kind of you
 * Karux (talk) 21:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * arendelle is one of the most gorgeous programming language I've ever known and i really support it— Dukehamid (talk) 22:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC) — Dukehamid (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Thanks Hamid, I wish others see this and help us express Arendelle matters to us
 * Karux (talk) 22:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * ,, : this is not about whether you like the topic of the article under discussion. If you want to salvage it, come up with reliable sources to establish notability. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 22:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * "I'm done. It's hard to argue with someone who has lots of articles. I have only fixed words and stuff in here never page creating or so. However I don't think this page ever gets to live and I don't have the energy to help that. Go on delete it. Arendelle also is in other pages try not to forgot to remove those. I've spent past week keeping the page safe. Talking to others, fixing what they thought was bad for wikipedia and I'm tired now. I think Arendelle has more and more reliable notable sources than many other pages. (make sure you read my first comment). and that was all I had to say. I hope that you can dream. Have fun cleaning..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karux (talk • contribs) 22:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * , there's nobody here that particularly wants to delete the article, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not everything in the world is a suitable topic. Specifically subjects must be notable in Wikipedia's special sense.  This does not mean subjects failing those criteria are worthless, just that they don't meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion.  For software, there are further guidelines at WP:NSOFT.  What we need is for someone, who is a reliable source, other than the people intimately involved in the project, to establish its notability.  Surely if this is worth an encyclopedia article someone will have written about it.  Primary sources are not generally acceptable, except for basic facts - for example question regarding the syntax of the language.  But other that *you're* assertion, and you're admitted not being impartial, why should there be an article?  Rwessel (talk) 00:27, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Easy call. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources discussing the topic in detail to demonstrate notability as required by WP:GNG.  Googling the web and books turned up absolutely nothing useful.  Msnicki (talk) 02:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOT #2. Could someone also clean up the mess Karux and Thechosendragon left in several other articles? —Ruud 09:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I got some of them, but I think the additions to the various "comparison of programming language (x)" need to stay unless the article is actually removed. Rwessel (talk) 09:45, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I think we can invoke the snowball clause here. Or just not forget to do it after the AfD is over. —Ruud 11:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your heavenly words. I will fix it myself 31.59.239.7 (talk) 09:59, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you Karux or Thechosendragon? If so please consistently log-in when editing.  It make things hard to follow if you don't.  Thank you.  Rwessel (talk) 10:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well who cares the importance is fixing Wikipedia and it was me --Karux (talk) 12:56, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * So I'm fixing everything. And I will list the pages I fixed here:
 * * List of programming languages
 * * List_of_programming_languages_by_type#Educational_languages
 * * List_of_educational_programming_languages#Children
 * * Comparison of programming languages (array)
 * * Comparison of programming languages (syntax)
 * * Comparison of programming languages (strings)
 * * Arendelle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.59.225.119 (talk) 15:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * And I didn't have the authorization to remove this one:
 * * Computer_Programming/Hello_world
 * I'm searching to see if there is any other page and don't you worry I will clean them up. (Just use nice words please) Karux (talk) 12:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Unless some evidence of notability shows up. My comments above apply.  Rwessel (talk) 09:45, 4 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete: I originally suggested this be speedied as spam. There is plenty of evidence here that the language exists, but none that it is notable. People make up new languages everyday. I've made up three myself, but I don't believe they belong here on Wikipedia. Karux's contention that the kind of coverage we're looking for doesn't exist for computer languages seems bizarre to me. There is plenty of coverage for notable languages like java, swift, C, and so on. ubiquity (talk) 14:47, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Toffanin (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.