Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/HotBasic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] HotBasic
Advertisement for software project being run from someone's angelfire page. —Stormie 04:25, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Changing my vote to abstain for the moment - while I'm still dubious about the notability of HotBasic I'm not going to call for its deletion while there are still articles on so many other BASIC implementations of similarly dubious notability - see BASIC programming language#Dialects, especially such as Bxbasm, Gambas, Gnome Basic, HBasic.. —Stormie 09:13, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
-
- This seems to be inconsistent with what you said below. Precedence doesn't work all the time. In this case, after looking at the ones you mentioned, solely from their articles alone, I'm inclined to say that Bxbasm should be deleted (I just started a VfD on it, in fact), Gnome Basic and HBasic are on the line, and Gambas definitely should stay. Google numbers tend to agree (66 hits for bxbasm, several hundred thousand for gambas). CryptoDerk 18:13, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. So what difference does this make from the rest of the BASIC variants listed here? BASIC_programming_language#Birth_and_early_years Gabs 04:30, Oct. 5, 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. The other versions listed there (in the early years section) like Quick BASIC, Tiny BASIC, Altair BASIC, etc. are all notable because of their influence and popularity. Even the list of a few dozen at the bottom I'm mostly familiar with. Google turns up 191 pages, of which there are only 50 unique websites, and most of those are message boards. CryptoDerk 04:57, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
-
- So does this mean HotBasic does not qualify because it has not yet reached its influence the same as all the others? Several entries in the BASIC_programming_language page are no more popular than HotBasic. Besides, HotBasic was meant as an alternative to RapidQ, whose development has already stopped and was sold to REALbasic, which by the way, is a more commercial product than HotBasic is. So does this also mean it has to have familiarity with you in order to gain acceptance in Wikipedia? Gabs 05:07, Oct. 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Obviously I wouldn't vote to delete solely based on whether or not I was familiar with it unless it was in my area of expertise. Of course, I've taught programming at a college level and I've written a book on C programming, so... However, all that aside, are you serious? REALbasic turns up nearly 800,000 hits. You're trying to compare 800,000 to 50? Google isn't a do-or-die litmus test, but according to the HotBasic website it's been out for over a year, and only 50 websites, of which most are message boards? This reeks of non-notability. CryptoDerk 05:20, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- So CryptoDerk, does this mean entries to Wikipedia should only be based on how popular they turn out from a Google search? The point here is that since the article on BASIC programming language has a listing of variants to the BASIC language, it is but acceptable to include new entries into the field such as HotBasic. Besides, the manner of entry I've posted there is no more introductory than how the other BASIC variants were listed.
- I believe I was very clear when I just stated that I DON'T believe that Google is a do-or-die litmus test. You questioned whether or not me having familiarity with it should influence my vote. I stated that since this falls under the field I'm familiar with, it could. You keep comparing HotBasic to other variants that ARE well known and on top of that DO have numbers to back them up. Your argument continues just because "HotBasic ... has not yet reached its influence" we should keep it? Your prediction of future notability isn't a valid argument for keeping this. CryptoDerk 05:41, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- So does this mean entries to Wikipedia should first be popular to be accepted for entry? I think that's a very limiting viewpoint on how Wiki, as the online encyclopedia that it is, should be used, or managed. Whether HotBasic has future notability outside of Wikipedia is not the issue. That said, HotBasic as the BASIC variant that it is deserves a point to be included in Wiki under the BASIC programming language, no less than those other variants listed under it. Gabs 06:00, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia contains articles about notable things, just like any encyclopedia. Would you expect to find an article on something non-notable in an encyclopedia? No -- that's the whole idea. That's one reason why we have VFD -- to come up with a consensus as to what's notable and what's not notable. Just as there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of BASIC variants created, not all of them are listed. You have not shown that HotBasic is notable, and even infer that it isn't, but it could be one day. Show some evidence that it's notable, that it has been used in many major software projects, that it had a major influence on the industry, and I'd be more than happy to change my vote. CryptoDerk 06:01, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Hmmm...SAM Basic programming language has no entry in Wiki and is not so different in popularity in Google as HotBasic is, with most of the Google entries coming from Wiki itself, AREV or Revelation Basic also has about as many entries in Google as HB has, so is there any point in accentuating several more such as these as more notable than HotBasic? Besides, in case you missed it, the first sentence in my entry was "HotBasic is a new BASIC compiler". Gabs 06:16, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- I get 13,200 results for a search on AREV BASIC, not the same as HotBasic which gets 50-200. And you still haven't provided any evidence of the notability of HotBasic. The fact that it's a new compiler doesn't help your case that this article should stay! CryptoDerk 06:54, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Hmmm...SAM Basic programming language has no entry in Wiki and is not so different in popularity in Google as HotBasic is, with most of the Google entries coming from Wiki itself, AREV or Revelation Basic also has about as many entries in Google as HB has, so is there any point in accentuating several more such as these as more notable than HotBasic? Besides, in case you missed it, the first sentence in my entry was "HotBasic is a new BASIC compiler". Gabs 06:16, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- You may think that this is a "very limiting viewpoint" on how Wikipedia should be used or managed, but a line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere and this is where discussions are held as to which side of the line an article falls. I'm sure you'd agree, for instance, that Albert Einstein should be in here, and (glancing around the room) list of business cards piled up on Stormie's desk should not. If so, we have common ground, and can discuss whether or not your compiler is notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. A good benchmark is: what would happen if every piece of free software that was as widely used as HotBasic had an encyclopedia article? Would the rest of the encyclopedia be swamped by these software listings? Bear in mind that there are currently 34,768 projects on Freshmeat [1]. This is why we use such things as "the Google test" to determine notability. —Stormie 06:49, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia contains articles about notable things, just like any encyclopedia. Would you expect to find an article on something non-notable in an encyclopedia? No -- that's the whole idea. That's one reason why we have VFD -- to come up with a consensus as to what's notable and what's not notable. Just as there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of BASIC variants created, not all of them are listed. You have not shown that HotBasic is notable, and even infer that it isn't, but it could be one day. Show some evidence that it's notable, that it has been used in many major software projects, that it had a major influence on the industry, and I'd be more than happy to change my vote. CryptoDerk 06:01, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- So does this mean entries to Wikipedia should first be popular to be accepted for entry? I think that's a very limiting viewpoint on how Wiki, as the online encyclopedia that it is, should be used, or managed. Whether HotBasic has future notability outside of Wikipedia is not the issue. That said, HotBasic as the BASIC variant that it is deserves a point to be included in Wiki under the BASIC programming language, no less than those other variants listed under it. Gabs 06:00, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- I believe I was very clear when I just stated that I DON'T believe that Google is a do-or-die litmus test. You questioned whether or not me having familiarity with it should influence my vote. I stated that since this falls under the field I'm familiar with, it could. You keep comparing HotBasic to other variants that ARE well known and on top of that DO have numbers to back them up. Your argument continues just because "HotBasic ... has not yet reached its influence" we should keep it? Your prediction of future notability isn't a valid argument for keeping this. CryptoDerk 05:41, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- So CryptoDerk, does this mean entries to Wikipedia should only be based on how popular they turn out from a Google search? The point here is that since the article on BASIC programming language has a listing of variants to the BASIC language, it is but acceptable to include new entries into the field such as HotBasic. Besides, the manner of entry I've posted there is no more introductory than how the other BASIC variants were listed.
- Obviously I wouldn't vote to delete solely based on whether or not I was familiar with it unless it was in my area of expertise. Of course, I've taught programming at a college level and I've written a book on C programming, so... However, all that aside, are you serious? REALbasic turns up nearly 800,000 hits. You're trying to compare 800,000 to 50? Google isn't a do-or-die litmus test, but according to the HotBasic website it's been out for over a year, and only 50 websites, of which most are message boards? This reeks of non-notability. CryptoDerk 05:20, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- So does this mean HotBasic does not qualify because it has not yet reached its influence the same as all the others? Several entries in the BASIC_programming_language page are no more popular than HotBasic. Besides, HotBasic was meant as an alternative to RapidQ, whose development has already stopped and was sold to REALbasic, which by the way, is a more commercial product than HotBasic is. So does this also mean it has to have familiarity with you in order to gain acceptance in Wikipedia? Gabs 05:07, Oct. 6, 2004 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Point taken. Well, it was worth the try. Maybe someday HotBasic will be notable enough to be included in your dictionary. Gabs 06:55, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Keep. Needs a bit of work so it isn't just advertising copy, but could be interesting. Needs info on the licence for the compiler. I gather that its free but not open source, but the website doesn't say this clearly.-gadfium 05:22, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
-
- gadfium, noted your message. I will tone it down some more if it needs to. Thanks for your vote to keep. Gabs 05:27, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Just a note, gabs/pinoygabs is the user who created the HotBasic article (prior to signing up for an account
- Delete; not notable. See also Wikipedia:Vanity page. - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 05:46, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Non-notable hobbyist variant of an obsolete programming language. jni 06:31, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable. Might be someday, but not now. --Improv 16:29, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Redirect to BASIC programming language —siroχo 22:42, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Most of the 185 google hits are just lists of programming languages, and the only programs I can find written in it are some small utilities (clock, number-base conversion, displaying ASCII character set, etc.) by the author of HotBasic itself, distributed from his homepage. Oh, and a "99 bottles of beer" program somewhere. Article says it's a "new variant compiler... introduced in 2003": it's young, and hasn't yet established any notability. Pnot 02:44, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Concur with —siroχo's suggestion of a redirect to BASIC programming language, where it is already included in the list of dialects. Change its appearance in that list from a Wikillink to an external link; I'm not opposed to that much promotion, even though Wikipedia is not a Web directory or a yellow pages. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:27, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
*Delete and remove from list of dialects in BASIC programming language. Changed my mind when I noticed Gabs's argument that the article HotBasic should be included because "Several entries in the BASIC programming language page are no more popular than HotBasic." If mentioning a language on the BASIC programming language is considered to mean that we must accept a full article on the language, then we cannot allow non-notable languages even to be mentioned. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:38, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Delete, no redirect: vanity, promotion, nonnotable. Wikipedia is not Freshmeat. Wile E. Heresiarch 22:42, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
