Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erlang (programming 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 speedy, obvious keep (non-administrator closure), with a wet trout slap to the nominator. Zetawoof_(ζ) 07:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Erlang (programming language)[edit]

The article lacks notability. Fikusfail (talk) 04:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Well referenced article on a notable subject. Camw (talk) 04:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - ditto --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable subject. 173.64.118.131 has been pasting unofficial notes of deletion ... inserting manual entries into deletion logs ... I.E., wasting our time. Proofreader77 (talk) 04:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Erlang is not notable enough to be warranted its own page. Perhaps we could consider adding it to a page on lesser-known languages of its' class? Fikusfail (talk) 04:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notability is well-established in the article. Townlake (talk) 04:50, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- All three programs written in Erlang do not constitute notability. There are many small, specialized programming languages with more known projects that are not considered notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Fikusfail (talk) 04:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - This is preposterous. It's a very popular example of a language that does distributed computing and concurrency Right (tm). It's concurrency model has been cloned as libraries in many other languages. --Cybercobra (talk) 05:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Prove that its concurrency model has been cloned. I do not see any references to this on the page. Fikusfail (talk) 05:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - An example. Google for "erlang-style concurrency" and observe the results; its model is clearly notable and well-discussed. --Cybercobra (talk) 05:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - The example listed above has not been touched in 5 years. Clearly no one has a use for this. Existence does not make something notable. Also, "it's" is a contraction for "it is". Please learn and use proper English, since this is the English Wikipedia. Fikusfail (talk) 06:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Um, there's no such thing as bit rot; an old last edit date doesn't magically make the project irrelevant. The very fact that that there are several clones (I just added a bunch more examples to the article) lends credence to its notability. (unrelated grammar nazi point well taken) --Cybercobra (talk) 06:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - People familiar with distributed systems and fault tolerant systems know and use Erlang. Fikusfail is only showing ignorance. Scala is an Erlang clone made to make Java programmers feel better.
- I would recommend actually finding some sources rather than making opinionated claims like the one above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fikusfail (talk • contribs) 05:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I would recommend doing something constructive with your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.102.189 (talk) 06:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep. Highly notable programming language. Nominator appears to be a WP:SPA. Jfire (talk) 06:55, 4 February 2009 (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.