Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V 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   keep. ff m  00:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

V language

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Claims to be a syntax-free computer language. I submit that it is impossible to have a syntax-free language, human or computer. Despite the refs, this language is not notable. - Sgroupace (talk) 20:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. But ,as I being a person who has tried the language, I can tell that there can be such type of a language. In fact the mechanism is quite simple. It uses natural language processing to process the input text and converts into a specific syntax (through dictionary modes, grammatical operations etc) and later executes it. I hope you may also tried AIML for chatter bots. Karthika.kerala (talk) 20:19, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep:For what it's worth, there is a syntax to V; it's just very loose. Take a look, for example, at this page:  http://www.grogammer.com/v/printmsg.html (the website that allows you to "program" in V).  It even says right there at the bottom of the page that there's a V syntax.  Dgcopter (talk) 20:40, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, syntax or not, its existence can be verified through the references, and some are of a quality that states notability. But I have marked it with advertisement for not being particularly neutral point-of-view, especially in the lead (which is not blatant enough to interfere with this AfD). Arsenikk (talk)  20:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Sgroupace is correct: there can be no language without syntax. Whether there is a syntax to V or not (of course there is), there should be correct syntax and correct claims in an article about V (or anything else). It doesn't look just look an ad, it looks like it's written by someone who has no authority to speak about syntax. This discussion shouldn't really be about V--it should be about the article about V. Karthika.kerala should do his homework. Drmies (talk) 03:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - one of my project volunteers told me that she had created an article in Wikipedia about language V. But the article doesn't carry any info related to AST used and the drawbacks of the current version. The article seems as if it is written to attract more developers for the project. Wikipedia is not the place for that ! Some one pl review the article and make it "neutral" .BTW, there is nothing wrong is saying that the V is "syntax free" because the input is in NL. It uses NLP to get the desired syntax. Pl refer to the project site for more tech details. Aasisvinayak (talk) 08:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Aasisvinayak's response puzzles me a bit. Are you talking about two different articles? (And please don't suggest that NL (natural language, I assume) is syntax-free--it is not. Yes, I am a grammarian. By profession.) This article needs to be rewritten to the point where the original is pretty much gone, if it's to be a keeper. Drmies (talk) 02:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep: I think from a programmer's POV it can be called as syntax free or at least very loose syntax as in the program "I would like to print", "I wish to print" , "I wanna print" or "Print" - all have the same effect. BTW, I shall incorporate the missing point and will rewrite the article from Neutral POV. Karthika.kerala (talk) 10:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:36, 21 September 2008 (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.