[tokenadult]

All anyone needs to do about this is find reliable sources to improve the articles that are being nominated for deletion. Really. If some wikipedian who knows about published, reliable sources about each of the languages simply adds some source citations to the articles, all will be well.

[ubernostrum]

Fun fact: I left a note for the guy asking why he doesn't do that (hunt up citations and improve articles).

His response was to go complain about how "ironic" that was on some other well-known deletionist's page, and whine about how he's "martyring" himself for Wikipedia.

In other words: there's basically no reasoning with the guy who's behind this.

[l0nwlf]

Because : "He will not reply to senseless accusations any longer. Don't bother nominating him for conflict of interest or vandalism or whatnot, it's already been tried and didn't work."

[ubernostrum]

Funny. I didn't make senseless accusations, didn't nominate him for anything. Just asked, matter-of-factly, why he was putting his energy into AfDs instead of into looking up references and trying to improve articles.

At which point (check his history if you care), he wandered over to another user's page to recruit help, saying:

One commenter even suggested I search for references to improve the articles in question, as opposed to nominating them for deletion (the sheer irony).

So, yeah, apparently asking him to channel his energies into something that's one of Wikipedia's main goals is "ironic" as well as "senseless"?

Sticking with my original conclusion that this is not someone who responds well to reason.

[chrismonsanto]

I would love to do that! The problem is that for the articles I nominated, no citations exist :(

[oconnore]

That statement is false.

Take Factor for example. It has been hosted at several conferences, has an active community of users, and has an academic paper published in ACM.

http://factorcode.org/littledan/dls.pdf

Perhaps what you meant to say is that no citations exist that meet your own apparently arbitrary standards of approval?

Edit:

It appears that it was another individual who recommended wiki/Factor for deletion. I apologize for my inaccurate accusation, but in my opinion that still does not excuse recommending the removal of Nemerle.

[jedsmith]

Or that he didn't spend enough time looking:

> It takes me but a few minutes to figure out whether I am going to nominate an article for deletion. A single hit that looks like it might possibly be a reliable source and I'm outta there.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2215437

Reassuring description of the process, there...

[chrismonsanto]

But I didn't nominate Factor for deletion...

[oconnore]

I apologize for the confusion, but that still doesn't change much. See these papers on Nemerle:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/events/sscli2005/pachols...

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/moskal/pdf/msc...

[Locke1689]

Ouch, this is really sad because it took me ~10 seconds on Google Scholar and I found the Nemerle papers. I'm on your side too (if a language seriously has no users and no publications, why have an article on it), but your research skills are giving us grad students a bad name ;)

[ubernostrum]

One suggestion I'd make (following up on my directing you to WP:POINT on your talk page) would be to research the history of Improv's famous spree, wherein he speedy-deleted a bunch of articles on different brands of cookies. You may learn some useful things about when to be strict on policy and when not to.

[kevinchen]

I don't think the solution is as simple as that, but references do help.