Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/QUIKSCRIPT


 * 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 of the debate was no consensus; keep. STANDARD DISCLAIMER: NO CONSENSUS NOW DOES NOT PRECLUDE CONSENSUS IN THE FUTURE. DO NOT CITE THIS AFD AS A REASON TO KEEP THE ARTICLE AS IS, REDIRECT IT, OR MERGE IT, IN ANY DEBATE OR EDIT WAR IN THE FUTURE. Johnleemk | Talk 11:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

QUIKSCRIPT
Non-notable? Compu ter  Jo  e  17:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Meh, merge to Simulation language. Melchoir 20:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable and unverified. Stifle 01:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and do NOT merge into simulation language (not notable enough). Has been mentioned in a peer reviewed journal. We currently have hundreds of articles on non-notable programming languages, if we are going to delete them we should make some criteria for notability of programming languages first and then organize a mass deletion. —Ruud 21:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

'This AfD is being relisted to generate a clearer consensus. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!' Johnleemk | Talk 11:46, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No vote on QUIKSCRIPT's notability, but I agree with Ruud. The nearest thing to a project of guidelines for programming languages is the more general Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(software) discussion.  So far they haven't proposed standards for including languages; some knowledgable people should add proposals.  Barno 01:35, 19 January 2006 (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.