Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lfyre

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete --Tony Sidaway^Talk 22:22, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lfyre

Programming language still in beta on sourceforge. humblefool® 01:08, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep No harm in having this article. --malathion ^talk 02:05, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Programming languages are great but this is nevertheless not notable. Would be happy to see it restored if the language gains any kind of popularity. Agentsoo 02:13, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep ---ScottyBoy900Q∞ 04:49, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep legitimate information can't hurt, there are more obscure things on wikepedia. Uber nemo 05:13, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment -- according to their statistics page on Sourceforge, there have been merely 826 downloads of this application served by them. Google search for lfyre programming gives a '206' results; it seems to not be a widely used language. --Mysidia 05:21, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Less than 1K downloads doesn't sound too notable to me. WP:NOT:Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Fernando Rizo T/C 09:29, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: There are all sorts of languages that don't get articles because they're not popular, significant, or used. 1,000 downloads is not at all sufficient to demonstrate adoption, and then there are no notices given in trade magazines, etc. Wikipedia is not Freshmeat.og. Further, Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or announcing your wicked cool language: when other documented sources speak of it, it will be time to consider an article. I don't know why voters are suddenly having so much trouble telling Wikipedia from Everything2, but Wikipedia is a tertiary source of information, not a primary. Geogre 15:52, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, Wikipedia is not an advertising vehicle, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, Wikipedia is not Freshmeat.org, and Wikipedia is not the place for this article. --Carnildo 19:31, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is not a promotional vehicle for subjects that have not yet demonstrated notability. Buffyg 14:32, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete on the "stop giving more slack to technical articles than non-technical ones" principle. Nandesuka 22:34, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. What Carnildo said. "Wikipedia is not advertising" is particularly prominent here. JRM · Talk 01:41, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

  Aside: having articles on things that are not even established yet does harm Wikipedia. It shouldn't become a place where the latest, greatest software projects can be announced/promoted, no matter how neutrally this is done. JRM · Talk 01:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete nn.  Grue  19:11, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete No argument. siafu 22:44, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.