Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armed Bear Common Lisp

{{Delrevafd|date=2009 October 29}}

: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 delete. Kwertii's links show that it exists, none of them are reliable sources, and as such, do not establish noability for Wikipedia. (X! · talk)  · @979  ·  22:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

=[[Armed Bear Common Lisp]]=

:{{la|Armed Bear Common Lisp}} ([{{fullurl:Armed Bear Common Lisp|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armed Bear Common Lisp}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Non-notable software product TexasAndroid (talk) 23:56, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete. This could probably be a speedy delete. Completely non-notable, no sources, etc. Renee (talk) 03:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Nothing on Gsearch or Gnews to show notability. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 03:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - did you actually do a search? There's tons of stuff: http://www.google.com/search?q=armed+bear+common+lisp. It is a well-known Lisp implementation. Kwertii (talk) 06:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

:* Did you actually read the search results to pull out anything to show notability? I specifically said nothing to show notability, not nothing at all. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 01:16, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep - major modern CL implementation. --Cybercobra (talk) 21:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (X! · talk)  · @053  ·  00:16, 9 July 2009 (UTC){{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armed Bear Common Lisp||}}

  • Delete per the lack of reliable sources. Kewrtii's Google search returns many Google results, but none of them are reliable sources that cover Armed Bear Common Lisp in depth. A [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22armed+bear+common+lisp%22&btnG=Search&um=1&scoring=a Google News Archive search] returns no results, and I have been unable to find sources through other searches. Cunard (talk) 18:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - simply because you've never heard of it doesn't mean that it's not notable. While ABCL is certainly not international headline news on the front page of the New York Times, it is a major Lisp implementation which is well known among Lisp programmers. To establish notability further than the above Google search, herewith a selection of third-party ABCL references, among the many others that exist:
  • [http://www.lispniks.com/faq/faq.html] - Peter Seibel (author of [http://gigamonkeys.com/book/ a popular Lisp textbook])'s Lisp FAQ; includes ABCL as a major Lisp implementation (the first one listed, in fact)
  • [http://www.cliki.net/Armed%20Bear%20Lisp] - well known, major, third party Lisp wiki, indicating notability
  • [http://www.cl-user.net/asp/impl/ABCL] - another well known, major, third party Lisp wiki article
  • [http://www.international-lisp-conference.org/2009/schedule] - major international Lisp conference that includes ABCL based presentations.
  • [http://bc.tech.coop/blog/040627.html] - well known, major, third party Lisp blog which references ABCL here and elsewhere, numerous times
  • [http://www.lispnyc.org/soc.clp] - New York City Lisp club's Google Summer of Code proposal including ABCL work
  • [http://markmail.org/message/cvnhxcybiz7fr4o7] Usenet discussion of ABCL in com.googlegroups.jvm-languages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwertii (talk • contribs)

:: Please read WP:NOTE. References to establish notability must be reliable, independent, non-trivial. Other wikis, blogs, and Usenet discussions are not reliable. The remainder would be considered trivial references, as none are directly about ABCL, they just happen to mention it. I'm sorry, but those just do not IMHO establish notability to Wikipedia's standards. Sorry. - TexasAndroid (talk)

: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.