Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rakudo Perl 6


 * 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   keep. JohnCD (talk) 22:44, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Rakudo Perl 6

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. The refs are first party or very narrow specialist (perl) ones; no computing ones, never mind non-specialist ones. The only ones with any depth are promotional, written by the creators. A search turns up nothing better. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 19:29, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Added refs to notable sources from outside the perl6 community. ReiniUrban (talk) 00:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * one of those is just a link to and summary of the announcement. The other is a long interview with only one question on Rakudo, and is still on a Perl related site, of the publisher of the Camel book after which this seems to be named.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 01:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

What about this entry on fedoraproject.org? --Grondilu (talk) 01:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep There is no requirement in either verifiability WP:V or reliable sources WP:RS policies for sources to be "non-specialist". The criterion for notability merely requires multiple, in-depth reliable sources independent of the Rakudo's creators and major contributors. The Linux today article and O'Reilly interview cited in the article qualify as independent RS. In particular, O'Reilly publishes book on many computer topics, but none on Rakudo that I know of, so independence in the sense of no financial conflict of interest is satisfied here. There are also an SD Times article and an interview with one of the Rakudo architects. These four sources are enough to pass WP:GNG notability guidelines. The article itself could use better sourcing, but has no insurmountable issues, per WP:SURMOUNTABLE. A notable topic and surmountable problems suggests keeping the article. --Mark viking (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Quit being a stickler ActionScript/VB user, JohnBlackburne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bitasc (talk • contribs) 02:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)  — Bitasc (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * 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.