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 List of BASIC dialects. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bywater BASIC

[edit]

I clumsily prod'd this without checking the history; it's actually been proposed for deletion twice before - so let's bring it here for discussion. I believe that Bywater does not meet the notability threshold for inclusion, based on a lack of coverage by reliable, independent sources (WP:GNG) Marasmusine (talk) 08:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 17:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - It's verifiable (here, near the bottom), but probably doesn't meet notability guidelines. I wouldn't be at all opposed to merging this somewhere per WP:PRESERVE. Likely targets might be something like List of Linux software, List of BASIC compilers, or maybe a "compilers" section in BASIC. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 18:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The target you're looking for is List of BASIC dialects, where it already has an entry. I have no opinion whether this should be kept, merged, redirected, or deleted and redirected, but it shouldn't be left a redlink. —Korath (Talk) 21:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have no objection to a list entry (redlinked or otherwise), providing there is at least a modicum of an indication of importance. Marasmusine (talk) 08:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no coverage in reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 16:14, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~Redirect - fails to have multiple non-trivial sources. Has a single borderline non-triv source. It's a shame that the info will probably be lost to wp, but google bywater basic and it's clear the info is there in the first hit. Bigger digger (talk) 00:57, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per S Marshall below, there is no WP:POTENTIAL for an article here, but I suppose we should replace it with a redirect to List of BASIC dialects and remove the link from the list. I've added a bit of information to the list for Bywater, but in general there's nothing WP:Notable here. Bigger digger (talk) 15:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of BASIC dialects. It's plausible enough as a search term that it probably shouldn't be a redlink.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 01:01, 18 May 2009 (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.