Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Why the lucky stiff


 * 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 per consensus. I find it somewhat interesting those who wished to delete the article were both IPs. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 21:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

why the lucky stiff
Originally PROD'd with the reason that the subject did not find himself to be notable. I'd prefer if this was decided based on WP:BIO, which he may meet. Bringing to AfD for consensus.--Isotope23 17:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Please keep. I have a moderate interest in Ruby and decided to look up 'why the lucky stiff' in the Wikipedia and was glad to find the aticle. He's definitely a well known figure in the Ruby community and has had a large influence on it.
 * Keep. chocolateboy 02:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not assert notibiliy with external links. Writing some software is not notable unless there are media mentions etc. Some please also AFD Why's (poignant) Guide to Ruby with this article as it is a unnotable book.--155.144.251.120 02:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * W(p)GtR, despite of the fact that it's not complete, is one of the best-known Ruby guides/tutorials. Not really all that sure about the author. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 12:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Somewhat weak keep A lot of people think they're not notable enough. A lot of people have greater minds than anything written on fixed medium can possibly reflect. The facts that you can say and can source according to WP's policies don't really make him sound too impressive. I agree in that there's not really all that many facts that can be said about him, except for the fact that if you mention the name to any Ruby programmer, they've probably heard the name. I don't think he has been involved in really damn important breakthroughs, but we do have articles about people who have even less important stuff done. In conclusion, biography articles are boring. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 12:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Definite keep. Despite _why's modesty, he is quite notable in the Ruby programming community.  His Poignant Guide is probably the most recommended beginner's guide to Ruby after the pickaxe book (Programming Ruby, by Dave Thomas and Andy Hunt). And yes, he and his software are talked about in articles and books (including the pickaxe).  --OinkOink 16:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. W(p)GtR is an important ruby book. Furthermore his contributions to Ruby and programming in general are not done. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.49.164.17 (talk) 10:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep. I respect why's modesty, and humility, but his contributions to the Ruby community and the web software community in general are significant enough to merit an article here.  It's not just the Poignant Guide, but also Markaby, Camping, Hpricot, and maybe sometime soon Sandbox that carve him a small page of record here.  We might foster more goodwill with the subject of the article if we respect his modesty and remove the image, though I think it is not inappropriate on its own.  Klondike 07:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cool guy, but not notable for an encyclopedia. 128.175.205.133 00:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Definitely keep. Quite important figure in the Ruby community - if Ruby is notable, _why is notable. &#8465;ilver&#167;&#8465;ide 07:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Definitely keep. The Poignant Guide is a work of art and a damn good book on programming. It may not have an ISBN number, but I suggest you read the book and then decide if the author isn't worth a Wikipedia page. Also, Why wrote Syck, a library that is included in the Ruby language. Kristleifur 10:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think it's borderline whether it should or shouldn't be here - but since _why doesn't want to have an article on him, I think that it's okay to delete it... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.208.7.240 (talk) 18:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Definitely keep. Besides a great book on Ruby, he designed a tutorial that even other heavier name brands such as Python do not have. I've heard mainframes used to have a 'Learn' program that helped prod users along, and then would help them write new programs without ever knowing a thing about C. (Read: an interactive javascript ruby console that guides users through some parts of ruby... minus the mainframe and 90% of the web can use) User:phreaki
 * 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.