Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Standard Portable Intermediate Representation

: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 no consensus. Nakon 05:02, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

=[[Standard Portable Intermediate Representation]]=

:{{la|Standard Portable Intermediate Representation}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Standard_Portable_Intermediate_Representation Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Standard Portable Intermediate Representation}})

The notability of this topic has not been provided in the article.   Bfpage |leave a message  14:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

::Relevant is not important. Notable, as defined by secondary sources, is important. PianoDan (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete This IR has been recently announced, but is not used anywhere. It seems this is a case of WP:TOOSOON--not enough time has elapsed for this IR to gain multiple in depth reliable sources needed for notability per WP:GNG. Maybe when OpenCL 2.1 comes out with SPIR as the IR, this will gain more notability over time. But until then, delete. --Mark viking (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. Doesn't seem like a case of WP:TOOSOON to me - the standard has been around for a while, and the article doesn't have to be exclusively about SPIR-V (though considering that it's completely rewritten, this choice of version numbering seems strange). There's a little bit of coverage in the kinds of places you'd expect to cover such a niche topic - [http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTE4MzM Phoronix] on the 2012 1.0 draft, [http://www.anandtech.com/show/8360/khronos-announces-opencl-spir-20 Anandtech] and [http://www.techenablement.com/commercial-opencl-spir-2-0-protects-ip-yet-allows-powerful-portable-source-code-free-kernels/ TechEnablement] on the 2014 2.0 version, [https://appdevelopermagazine.com/2462/2015/3/4/Khronos-Group-Introduces-New-Vulkan-Hardware-Driver-API-and-SPIR-V-Intermediate-Language-Shared-by-Vulkan-and-OpenCL-2.1/ App Developer Magazine] on the 2015 release, now-out-of-date [https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/using-spir-for-fun-and-profit-with-intel-opencl-code-builder Intel Tutorial]. Not exactly in-depth, true, but enough to prevent the waste of deleting the article and recreating it again in a few months. (BTW, PianoDan, some of the standards in this navbox family might be borderline but OpenCL, OpenGL, etc.? Not in doubt.) Opabinia regalis (talk) 05:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

::Agree with that, and general comment retracted. Still don't see this one as notable. PianoDan (talk) 19:08, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:02, 31 March 2015 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.