Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EASY (computer language) Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/EASY_(computer_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 delete. Rlendog (talk) 15:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

EASY (computer language)

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

I found no coverage. SL93 (talk) 22:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There doesn't seem to be any for tdbengine (the database that includes EASY as its scripting language), either. Dricherby (talk) 00:36, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:47, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Searching for sources is a pain: Google will direct you to easy computer languages, like BASIC and LOGO, rather than the computer language called EASY. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 19:37, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of evidence of passing WP:GNG. Given the difficulty of searching for the subject by its own name, I tried searching for "Tdbengine" but the results in Google scholar and Google news were too meager to convince me of any notability that it might have. This is a sub-component of the Tdbengine project, which itself seems to fail notability, and there is no evidence that it has any significance beyond the Tdbengine project. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:09, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Tdbengine (which may well eventually be deleted for lack of notability). --Kvng (talk) 16:52, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:00, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – not notable; not worth merging to another equally non-notable topic. --Lambiam 08:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as part of a piece of proprietary software with no separate coverage, it's only going to rate a mention in the page on its parent product. And tdbengine doesn't seem notable either. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:43, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per Lambiam. --Chip123456 (talk) 19:48, 14 May 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.