Template talk:Major programming languages

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
November 2004 to 15 May 2005 16 May 2005 to 10 June 2006

Contents 1 Deleted

[edit] Deleted

This template has been deleted per Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_May_25#Template:Major_programming_languages. I have left the talk page in place if people want to discuss alternatives to this template. —Ruud 20:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I was one who originally wanted to delete this template because of its inherit POV issues, but ultimately I agreed with other editors on a compromise of using this template as a navigation aid. I do agree that the template had gotten out of hand as fans of non-major languages kept inserting their favorite languages. I would have voted to keep and fix the inclusion criteria (as I had lobbied to do at another time, but was shot down). At any rate, I am sad that as a significant editor of this template, I was not notified that the template was up for deletion. Wikipedia needs to be changed to make it a requirement that all past editors are notified when something is brought up for deletion consideration. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 19:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

You didn't follow the deletion discussion? matt kane's brain 21:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't know it was up for deletion. I don't watch all articles I've ever edited. I like to maintain my sanity. :) —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 22:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I thought that you meant you were the one who nominated it for deletion. Is it forbidden to bring it back now? matt kane's brain 12:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

If something has been deleted, it is generally not a good idea to try to resurrect it, unless perhaps all the problems discussed in the deletion process are resolved. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 17:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

One idea that came to me is that perhaps we should have a template that linked to families of programming language, with the actual languages linked on those articles. It is usually easier to get people to agree on a classification of a language than it is to get them to agree on its notability, and things can always be in two lists if necessary. GreenReaper 18:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm the template creator. I was not aware that the template was up for deletion, although I had been watching it, but I rather expected it to get deleted eventually - although I believe it was a useful navigation aid, it was too subjective. As for linking to proglang families, adding more clicks to reach common articles of interest compromises its role as a navigation aid. Maybe it would be better to define a similar template using a purely objective criterion such as statistics research listing the number of programmers who know/use a language. Whatever. Deco 20:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)