Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caméléon 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 Speedied as G7 - OP blanked the page. Alexf(talk) 23:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Caméléon language

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Zero indication of notability. Joel Why? talk  12:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

One article in arxiv as reference --TarielVincent (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC) One active mediawiki related to this language --TarielVincent (talk) 13:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability whatsoever. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:19, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the language Tersus has also no evidence of notability (no academic publication) just a website of the enterprise. But, this language has a wiki webpage. I do no integrate the website of this language to not do some advertising related to this language. But I can include it to add notability. --TarielVincent (talk) 13:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. So far, you have proven this language exists, but you have not provided any evidence that it is notable. This is nothing personal; if you can find evidence of notability, we will happily change our 'votes'.    Joel Why?  talk  13:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * What is the intended meaning of "I do no integrate the website of this language to not do some advertising related to this language" since it is not quite English and not quite logical.  Edison (talk) 15:19, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my english !!! Caméléon is an open-source language developed by shinoe software. To avoid an advertisement for this enterprise, my intention was to not include the caméléon home page as external link in its wiki page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TarielVincent (talk • contribs) 15:27, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * This language has already an application in Image Processing with some academia and industrial users  and with a peer reviewing validation  .  I could understand an argument this page is incomplete but I do not understand No evidence of notability. If you can advice me about what do you expect, I will try to provide it. Thanks !!! --TarielVincent (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest you read WP:NOTE for an explanation about what we mean by notability.    Joel Why?  talk  15:27, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence has been presented that it satisfies WP:N or any relevant notability subguideline. Edison (talk) 15:20, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG.  Sources provided are WP:PRIMARY and thus, not helpful.  Further the article is self-promotional.  The author is of the article is one of the authors of this new language, which is an obvious WP:Conflict of interest.  Wikipedia is not a means of WP:PROMOTION, nor a WP:CRYSTALBALL of things that may someday become notable, nor for things you WP:MADEUP.  Msnicki (talk) 18:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Thanks Msnicki ! I am agree with these relevant arguments. I cannot provide arguments to oppose. So, You can delete the page. Thanks wiki reviewers--TarielVincent (talk) 07:35, 7 June 2012 (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.