Talk:Aurora (programming language)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page has been marked for deletion because it is the opinion of very few people that Aurora is not notable enough. I don't understand why this article should be deleted on the say-so of so few people? I am not entirely sure how to even start defending the article with me being a beginner contributing to this site. First of all i tried to make the article as neutral sounding as possible by looking at the other language articles and following their style. Not only that, but this lanuage is maturing and will be fully released in a few weeks.

This article was to pre-emp the research of the computer science community and general public regarding Aurora. Of course to you this must sound like marketing talk and one big advert but other users and i hold Aurora in extremely high regard within the OOP systems languages and is a potential successor to C++, which of course DOES make it notable. You show me another language other than Java or SmallTalk that rivals Aurora? This has created alot of dissapointment in the current Aurora community especially as the release date is so imminent.

Also using google results as an indicator of being worthy for inclusion into this site is unreliable at best. Searching for mentions of Aurora returns a few thousand results, but is this an indication of its importance to the computer science community? I don't personally think so.

Lets take an example of other articles that appear on this site, lets take for example Doug Koupal. Who is Doug Koupal? I don't know either, but his contributions must of been NOTABLE because he has had a shiny wikipage for a year now. And guess what, he returns between 3-4 results from google!

Marking this article for deletion is a matter of opinion by someone who doesn't know anything about the subject of computer science or programming languages in general. Aurora IS notable and will gain global acclaim once it is released. This article was created to educate people quickly about Aurora's design, feature set and history. Which is exactly the point of an encyclopedia.

Kalekold 23:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Do not claim that the person who nominates this for deletion "doesn't know anything about the subject of computer science or programming languages in general". I know enough to see this is unreleased and not notable yet. An article can always be written if and when it becomes notable after it is released. As of now it isn't notable. Kimchi.sg 23:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

On what criteria do you use to judge wether or not something is notable?

Kalekold 09:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:SOFTWARE, which is basically a specialised version of Wikipedia:Notability. Its essence: The software must have been featured in detail by two or more reliable sources (such as newspapers or magazines). Kimchi.sg 01:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)