Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crystal (programming 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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:07, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Crystal (programming language)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Crystal (programming language) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Topic has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, so it fails GNG Charmk (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Charmk (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Charmk (talk) 19:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:59, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

*Keep - Again not notable to the length it goes on but would be a nice stub. Coffeeluvr613 (talk) 23:34, 5 July 2019 (UTC) sock vote Charmk (talk) 09:13, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

• Suggesting speedy keep per User:Stifle at User talk:Charmk#User warning: Disrupting Wikipedia to illustrate a point. To properly determine the value and notability of these programming languages, we need experts in the specific application fields as well as language design and history. However, the many nominations of the same type at present do not allow careful research in the given time, so it's better to keep a weak article than to accidently lose a notable one just because someone was WP:POINTY.

--Matthiaspaul (talk) 16:12, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:49, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

• Keep; I think it's clear this is a valid AFD. I'd say it's a pretty bad sign when a page about a computer language that has no historical importance doesn't bring any one to actually defend it. However, doing the Google News search, CBR Online (link blocked?) has an overview, SDTimes has several small pieces on Crystal updates, InfoWorld has a couple articles that go into some detail on Crystal as part of roundup of new languages. Pragmatic Bookshelf published Programming Crystal (ISBN 9781680502862) by Simon St. Laurent and Ivo Balbaert, neither of whom are developers. It's not far, but it seems over the line.--Prosfilaes (talk) 08:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:32, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

• Keep Crystal is niche, but not an esolang. It's been in active development for a number of years, accumulating 13558 stars on GitHub. There are currently 4605 libraries registered for it. It's significantly more popular than e.g. Elm. It's taught on Exercism.io. It seems to be tracked on the TIOBE index. Describing the authors of Programming Crystal as not being developers appears to be false. As a programmer, it's hard to imagine the criteria by which one could reasonably exclude Crystal from Wikipedia. Tenebrous (talk) 04:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia cares more about works published about the subject by third parties than usually any form of intrinsic notability. I wasn't referring to the authors of Programming Crystal as not being programmers, but rather as not being developers of Crystal, and thus independent of the subject. (In this set of DRs, there were specific mention of that, IIRC, that I was responding to.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:09, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
    • So what exactly is meant by, "To properly determine the value and notability of these programming languages, we need experts in the specific application fields as well as language design and history" if this is meant to exclude any form of intrinsic notability? Tenebrous (talk) 01:35, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
      • I don't know; maybe you should ask him?--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

• The article is weak regarding citations from reliable sources, but this can be improved. Sufficient notability should be provided by the sources already mentioned by User:Prosfilaes. Crystal was also featured in Linux Magazine ([1]). It is supported by Travis CI ([2]) and CircleCI ([3]) and it's currently prominently featured on the Snapcraft store ([4]) which shows reception in the industry. There are also notable articles by various authors, for example on blogs of Twilio ([5]), Codeship ([6], [7], [8]) and Bruce Perens ([9], [10], [11]). Disclosure: I'm a member of the Crystal developer team. --$traight-$hoota (talk) 11:34, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

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.