Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extraction and reporting language Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Extraction_and_reporting_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. -- Cirt (talk) 06:02, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extraction and reporting language

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

Unverified novel term. The phrase is a substring of one of Perl's backronyms, but I can find no evidence it's an independent concept/categorization. Cybercobra (talk) 09:13, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found no evidence that this term is used except with reference specifically to Perl. And we don't need a separate article just for "Perl and Awk". Hans Adler 08:23, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
delete as per above: no evidence of its use outside of Perl, where it's already mentioned.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 10:42, 8 May 2011 (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.