4 ms·

> 2) not cited enough to count I look forward to your explanation, to other academics, of why their work doesn't "count" because it isn't "cited enough". I al

> 2) not cited enough to count I look forward to your explanation, to other academics, of why their work doesn't "count" because it isn't "cited enough". I also look forward to you explaining to us why you're qualified to determine whether a paper that you didn't write "counts". > I honestly didn't think that putting in a few AfDs would cause such a shitstorm, to the point where people are calling me a Nazi/asshole/whatnot on my user page. I also never thought my 15 minutes of fame would be for nominating Nemerle for deletion :) Maybe I should have a Wikipedia article...? Infamy is not the kind of fame that you want.

tptacek 16y ago
This comment is totally uncalled for. You're participating in a discussion about someone's effort to remove "non-notable" articles from Wikipedia. That someone actually took the time to comment on HN, for the first time, for this one story. Attempting to chase that person off HN by saying "get over yourself" decreases the quality of HN for everyone. Please don't do that.
- jedsmith 16y ago
  I edited it out before you commented, because I agreed upon a reread of my own comment.
chrismonsanto 16y ago
It's not that their work doesn't "count" in the more general sense of the word, it's that their work has not had enough impact at the moment to establish the notability of the topic. I'm sure the researchers in question did fine work, and in the future their work will be widely recognized. I'm as qualified as any other PL researcher (or Wikipedian) to determine the validity of a source. I didn't delete the articles based on my own opinion :( The purpose of the AfD process is to get the opinions of others so that a consensus can be established! I'm sorry -- I really am -- that the Alice ML and Nemerle communities were offended by my AfD. My nomination of a language for deletion does not speak for my opinion of the language itself. I figured if I was doing the wrong thing, that the AfD would result in a keep, and at the very least, sources that I had not found would be found by others to improve the article. One of the basic tenets of Wikipedia is "assume good faith", and very few have done so so far. I am completely open to civil discussion about any aspect of my work, and I would love to develop more concrete/relevant criteria for assessing notability of a programming language.
- jacques_chester 16y ago
  I don't know if I am accusing you of bad faith or not, by wikipedia standards. I just find that your approach (move to delete without, so far as I can tell, trying to directly improve the entries) to be destructive to wikipedia's purpose of expanding the availability and interconnectedness of knowledge. Why was wikipedia, and the public at large, better served by deleting these entries?
  - chrismonsanto 16y ago
    So many people create pet programming languages and add them to Wikipedia that the PL lists and categories are essentially useless. Most of the languages I propose for deletion have almost no information available about them, and therefore, one can't write a useful Wikipedia article about them. More information isn't necessarily better. Anything I am not 95% sure about I add a notability tag to or simply leave alone. There are a number of articles that I did in fact find interesting citations for while trying to decide notability. Napier88 is a good example of such a language -- the papers on it received hundreds of citations, yet I had never heard of the language. I've been working on an entire rewrite of Napier88 in my spare time, which has understandably become even more "spare" recently :)
    - jedsmith 16y ago
      > So many people create pet programming languages and add them to Wikipedia that the PL lists and categories are essentially useless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_list_of_programming_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_list_of_programming... What's useless about that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_object-oriented_programming_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_object-oriented_program... I don't see many pet projects here...
    - jacques_chester 16y ago
      > So many people create pet programming languages and add them to Wikipedia that the PL lists and categories are essentially useless. OK, so some of them might not even pass my standard of notability (which would be almost embarrassingly lax). But it strikes me that you're using notability to solve a user interface issue -- that you find it difficult to navigate the programming language section. More generally, it strikes me as horribly inefficient to rely on what one might call "outrage-driven notability" to correct for what were, you may now realise, erroneous selections for deletion. Maybe I'm a dolt for blaming you; you're acting rationally within a broken system.

tptacek 16y ago

This comment is totally uncalled for. You're participating in a discussion about someone's effort to remove "non-notable" articles from Wikipedia. That someone actually took the time to comment on HN, for the first time, for this one story. Attempting to chase that person off HN by saying "get over yourself" decreases the quality of HN for everyone. Please don't do that.

jedsmith 16y ago
I edited it out before you commented, because I agreed upon a reread of my own comment.

chrismonsanto 16y ago

It's not that their work doesn't "count" in the more general sense of the word, it's that their work has not had enough impact at the moment to establish the notability of the topic. I'm sure the researchers in question did fine work, and in the future their work will be widely recognized. I'm as qualified as any other PL researcher (or Wikipedian) to determine the validity of a source. I didn't delete the articles based on my own opinion :( The purpose of the AfD process is to get the opinions of others so that a consensus can be established! I'm sorry -- I really am -- that the Alice ML and Nemerle communities were offended by my AfD. My nomination of a language for deletion does not speak for my opinion of the language itself. I figured if I was doing the wrong thing, that the AfD would result in a keep, and at the very least, sources that I had not found would be found by others to improve the article. One of the basic tenets of Wikipedia is "assume good faith", and very few have done so so far. I am completely open to civil discussion about any aspect of my work, and I would love to develop more concrete/relevant criteria for assessing notability of a programming language.

jacques_chester 16y ago
I don't know if I am accusing you of bad faith or not, by wikipedia standards. I just find that your approach (move to delete without, so far as I can tell, trying to directly improve the entries) to be destructive to wikipedia's purpose of expanding the availability and interconnectedness of knowledge. Why was wikipedia, and the public at large, better served by deleting these entries?
- chrismonsanto 16y ago
  So many people create pet programming languages and add them to Wikipedia that the PL lists and categories are essentially useless. Most of the languages I propose for deletion have almost no information available about them, and therefore, one can't write a useful Wikipedia article about them. More information isn't necessarily better. Anything I am not 95% sure about I add a notability tag to or simply leave alone. There are a number of articles that I did in fact find interesting citations for while trying to decide notability. Napier88 is a good example of such a language -- the papers on it received hundreds of citations, yet I had never heard of the language. I've been working on an entire rewrite of Napier88 in my spare time, which has understandably become even more "spare" recently :)
  - jedsmith 16y ago
    > So many people create pet programming languages and add them to Wikipedia that the PL lists and categories are essentially useless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_list_of_programming_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_list_of_programming... What's useless about that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_object-oriented_programming_languages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_object-oriented_program... I don't see many pet projects here...
  - jacques_chester 16y ago
    > So many people create pet programming languages and add them to Wikipedia that the PL lists and categories are essentially useless. OK, so some of them might not even pass my standard of notability (which would be almost embarrassingly lax). But it strikes me that you're using notability to solve a user interface issue -- that you find it difficult to navigate the programming language section. More generally, it strikes me as horribly inefficient to rely on what one might call "outrage-driven notability" to correct for what were, you may now realise, erroneous selections for deletion. Maybe I'm a dolt for blaming you; you're acting rationally within a broken system.