Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qalb (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 no consensus. Consensus is unclear after 3 weeks, with the only expressions leaning to keep but without much conviction. (non-admin closure) Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Qalb (programming language)

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

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

Not notable; only one reputable source (The Register). elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 04:01, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The article has a 2nd independent source, to Mic (media company), by a known (and disgraced, but not in a way that should affect the usability of the source) reporter, in the 'Further reading' section. The sourcing looks just about adequate to document the language. — Charles Stewart (talk) 15:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:57, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - we have two sources providing SIGCOV. While I don't think there is all that much more interesting to be said about the language, now apparently a dormant project, the interaction between programming languages and human languages is an interesting and underdocumented one, and the article seems to be doing no harm. — Charles Stewart (talk) 03:48, 6 May 2022 (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.