Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linear syntax Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Linear_syntax

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 redirect to Comparison of programming languages (syntax)#Statements. Content can be merged from history editorially. Sandstein 08:45, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Linear syntax

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

No sources on page, can not find any mentions of this term in programming literature with the same meaning SlowByte (talk) 06:37, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:49, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (as per nom) along with Line-oriented programming language or merge what remains of both into Comparison of programming languages (syntax)#Statements. SpaceInnovader (talk) 13:21, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Comparison of programming languages (syntax)#Statements with a mention of the "Line-oriented language" terminology. "Line-oriented language" is a concept in programming languages and was a common approach in older languages line Fortran.[1] Newer languages like Ruby are also claimed to have some line-oriented features.[2] While well-known in the programming field, I don't know if there is sourcing sufficient to support a standalone article. Nevertheless, it is a verifiable concept and worth a mention in Comparison of programming languages (syntax)#Statements, where the concept is discussed. Linear syntax on the other hand seems to have no sourcing out there. So I recommend delete for Linear syntax, and redirect for Line-oriented programming language and Line-oriented language. --Mark viking (talk) 21:48, 8 May 2018 (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.