Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chef (programming language) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chef_(programming_language)

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 merge to Esoteric programming language. Courcelles 06:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chef (programming language)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article doesn't cite any references other than external links with dubious reliability. The article also appears to be original research, and in a somewhat non-encyclopaedic style. Topperfalkon (talk) 19:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Esoteric programming language. I'm happy to do the merge if the closer pings my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect for all the reasons listed by the nominator. besieged^talk 19:58, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. No evidence of encyclopedic relevance found, in particular a lack of coverage in reliable sources. --Michig (talk) 21:21, 7 December 2012 (UTC) Changing to Redirect to Esoteric programming language given the Cozens ref below, with perhaps a minimal merge (e.g. noting its creator)). --Michig (talk) 20:34, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article was previously discussed, but not (correctly) nominated, during Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esoteric programming languages, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ook! programming language and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Morgan-Mar. —Ruud 14:02, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete This is probably the least notable of the esoteric programming languages we still have articles on. Doesn't pass our standard for reliable sourcing anymore and no-one seems to have (bothered to) find or add sources, or improve the article in any other way, since the AfD 6 years ago. I oppose a merge with Esoteric programming languages in whole. If it doens't pass our standards for sourcing as a stand-alone article it won't pass our standards for sourcing when part of another article. Worse, it would skew the balance of Esoteric programming languages too much. Use of this as a small example in a rewritten version might be acceptable. —Ruud 14:02, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What you say is true. My intended merger would not include the extended example. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect The Chef language has an interpreter in Perl on CPAN as Acme::Chef and the language is described in Simon Cozen's book "Advanced Perl Programming" [1]. These and the primary references are probably not enough for notability for a stand-alone article, but are certainly enough for a section in the Esoteric programming languages article. I agree with Ruud that an abbreviated program example is best. Mark viking (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.