Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dynamic syntax tree (2nd nomination)

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 delete. Sandstein 19:03, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamic syntax tree[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article has been based on citations to a single author (David Syman) for years. I've done some checking and I can't find any refs independent of this author (there is a group of 2-3 individuals who coauthor papers on this subject with each other). The only use of this concept seems to be a product called 'Security Reviewer' - and all three authors are employed by this company. I don't think this meets WP:GNG as there are no independent references, so this article should be deleted. MrOllie (talk) 13:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:04, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (very selectively) to Program analysis or similar article. I fired off an abortive AfD for this four years ago then realized it should be a merge proposal - which I then never set up. This may be worth a short mention within an article on the wider topic, but it's definitely not notable enough for a standalone. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:41, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:17, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I can't find any independent coverage of this as a topic, so I think it doesn't meet WP:GNG. Happy to see it merged if Elmidae thinks there's something mergeable here, but it's not clear to me what material should be salvaged elsewhere. Ajpolino (talk) 18:05, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article does not appear to actually explain any particular technique for working with syntax trees. There is no description of an algorithm or a data structure. Instead, it appears to be an advertisement for some kind of research project, or maybe a product (hard to tell) that is used to do ... something. Hard to tell what that something actually is, other than that it involves parsing and abstract syntax trees in some unclear way. (I tripped over this article because I work with a typed dynamic abstract syntax tree system, and was making sure the wikipedia links in my documentation were appropriate. 😃) 67.198.37.16 (talk) 15:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.