Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of programming languages (functional programming) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Comparison_of_programming_languages_(functional_programming)

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. ✗plicit 04:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of programming languages (functional programming) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

There's two reasons why this is should be deleted. Either of them being true is sufficient for the article's deletion.

First, as the talk page states, it isn't clear what the criteria for inclusion on this article entails. Functions can express an infinite number of computations, so the number of functions this list could contain is quite literally infinitely large. The existence of this article seems to be an open invitation to violate WP: INDISCRIMINATE. Computers can do infinitely many things. Do we really need a listicle to describe all the things we can think computers can do?

Second, this article is filled with original research. This article consists of tables that take contents from disparate sources. None of the sources in the article actually compare functions across languages. Even if such sources exist, WP: TNT is in play, because cleaning up this article would amount to essentially blanking the article. HyperAccelerated (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Lists. Zeibgeist (talk) 21:34, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete against nomination. The problem here (and the only reason I can see to delete it) is that there's nothing here to keep. The topic is a useful one, although also one that WP would generally regard as inevitably OR. But there's just nothing worth keeping. The languages covered miss those most interesting to the topic, the dimensions covered aren't particularly good coverage of what's needed. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete classic OR by synth, Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:13, 3 March 2025 (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.