| Revision as of 20:01, 18 September 2006 editIsotope23 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users16,870 edits →[]: Delete← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:31, 19 September 2006 edit undoLinaMishima (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,419 edits →[]: returning briefly to commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| :--] 15:47, 18 September 2006 (]]]) | :--] 15:47, 18 September 2006 (]]]) | ||
| * '''Delete - already merged''' whilst the concept of overloading by direction is interesting, it's technically nothing new, and not something that new works would be based upon. Lack of verification is an issue. ] 02:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:31, 19 September 2006
2L programming language
This article was part of the mass AfD of "Esoteric Programming languages overturned by DRV here. It is being relisted for individual consideration. All these languages will be relisted, at five/day to prevent congestion. This is a procedural nomination, so I abstain. Xoloz 14:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Delete derivative nn cruft. Once you have seen P′′ (which is cool), you have seen all of these "languages". Leibniz 15:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, no demonstrated notability.--Isotope23 20:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Comment There have been many previous esoteric programming language-related AfDs, often with mass nominations. Not all of the following will be relevant, but many may be.
|
Dates shown are the date on which the debate started.
Previous Esoteric programming language-related deletion debates:
|
- Delete - already merged whilst the concept of overloading by direction is interesting, it's technically nothing new, and not something that new works would be based upon. Lack of verification is an issue. LinaMishima 02:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)