Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Small matter of programming

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Small matter of programming[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 seems to be a dictionary entry based on two small entries in esr's Jargon File and the IBM Jagon Dictionary. There is a book with the title "A Small Matter of Programming" by Bonnie A. Nardi, and this book is being frequently mentioned by other publications, but neither the book nor its mentions seem to be mainly about the term itself. Worse, the term seems to be used in non-ironical ways in some articles, like http://disrupt-africa.com/2019/02/kenyas-brck-partners-facebook-to-simplify-mobile-network-deployments/ -- contradicting the whole point of the Wikipedia article. I think this is mostly original research, and possibly even a citation loop based on the age of this article. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - other sources include an entire column in Programming Pearls, Second Edition - see https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/programming-pearls-second/9780134498058/ch05.html. Just the 2 paragraphs visible without logging in make it clear that SMOP is used ironically --DannyS712 (talk) 05:33, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't think it is OR. I have heard the phrase several times in my career in the UK and Europe. scope_creep^Talk 11:06, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't "I have personally heard this phrase used" the essence of OR? DS (talk) 15:40, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No. Basing an article on what one has personally heard is OR. Basing an opinion on whether something is well known, in an AfD, when the article itself is appropriately sourced, is what we should be doing, and not something that it is appropriate to complain about. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:35, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Considering that this phrase (namely "Small matter of programming") can be relatively regarded as an applicable/suitable phrase, and since there seems to have pretty sufficient related sources --in the internet--, as a result presumably it is better to be kept; but it would be better if the provider of the mentioned article add more reliable sources to that. Ali Ahwazi (talk) 07:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's definitely a long-attested phrase, and the sources discuss it as a phrase, rather than merely using it and leaving us to infer the meaning from context. I pushed the Jargon File citation back to the 1983 version for history's sake. XOR'easter (talk) 18:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Computer scientist and Professor Bonnie Nardi wrote a book that expanded on the term Small Matter of Programming. Have added this to the article and tidyed it up. Britishfinance (talk) 14:02, 22 March 2019 (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.