Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whitespace (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 Keep. Although this article currently has sourcing problems, a sufficient number of wikipedians felt it should be kept. Interested editors are encouraged to continue to search for sources. JERRY ^talk _contribs 12:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whitespace (programming language)[edit]

Esoteric programming language. I have not been able to find any coverage in reliable sources for it. Most coverage seems to be in blogs, and Google Scholar returns no results at all for "Whitespace Programming language." [1] Snthdiueoa (talk) 14:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Yes it's a bizarre language, BUT it is a valid and explicit representation of language definitions, range of programming language, and compilation. It was made as a sort of joke, but it does have meaning within the community. Just because it looks useless doesn't mean that the theory behind it, and its existence, is useless too. It's also Turing complete, IIRC. You wouldn't go deleting the 'Java' page, just because some people deem it an overly basic and clumsy language.Dancraggs (talk) 11:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - interesting and noteable exactly because it is esoteric. Nobody codes in it, I think, but it is a kind of "look what's possible" item that should remain precisely due to the curiosity value. --213.191.86.14 (talk) 17:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry, but WP:INTERESTING is not a valid reason for keep. Wikipedia policy (WP:N) need to see non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources. Snthdiueoa (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I too am having a hard time finding a good source of information. Interestingly, this article has equivalent articles on German Wikipedia, French Wikipedia (which is weird, because we don't create a lot of articles "just 'cause" in French) and a few more languages. But again, these Wikis don't have any sources either. Makes me wonder how notable this programming language is. • Supāsaru 21:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For prior discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esoteric programming language related/Detail. Uncle G (talk) 01:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I wasn't aware of the previous discussion: there was nothing about it on the article's talk page. However, none of the arguments in it address the issue at stake: there is no coverage in reliable secondary sources. Snthdiueoa (talk) 09:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 16:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

here is a link to whitespace http://compsoc.dur.ac.uk/whitespace/

That's a link to the whitespace home page. It's a primary source. I'm looking for reliable secondary sources which is what is required to justify the existence of an article on Wikipedia. Snthdiueoa (talk) 13:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are programs written in Whitespace on the WWW. Besides, in what way are the sources for Whitespace (programming language) any more or less reliable than those for the Brainfuck programming language? –Peter J. Acklam (talk) 21:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm asking for reliable secondary sources such as newspaper articles, peer reviewed research papers, and so on, where Whitespace is the main subject. There don't seem to be any -- only non-notable blogs. If I'm wrong, please point us in the direction of some such sources. Snthdiueoa (talk) 22:34, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it has any formal coverage, most of these estoric languages don't, but it does have a description at http://compsoc.dur.ac.uk/whitespace/ and there does seem to be an article at http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/31/1048962694949.html covering the topic. It is an interesting twist on the conventional idea of a programming language, as most languages ignore whitespace. Again there is not much formal academic references to the topic, but it is covered by multiple 3rd party sources including newsgroups etc, whether or not this widespread discussion of a concept is enough for wikipedia I don't know. Cheers! LinEagle (talk) 16:53, 28 January 2008 (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.