[cygx]

Wikipedia doesn't care about Github stars, forks or discord members, but "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

As far as I'm aware, there are no articles in the press about Odin, no academic papers, no non-self-published books, no conference talks, not anything that rises to the standard required by Wikipedia for inclusion of a topic.

[Rochus]

As I said, at some point the bueraucracy took over. In the good days of Wikipedia we just added or improved what interested us, no "authority" or bueraucracy involved. Here in Switzerland, we have a fitting expression for the present behavior in face of obsolescence: "schön sterben" (to die beautifully).

[cygx]

In the good days of Wikipedia we just added or improved what interested us, no "authority" or bueraucracy involved.

Such approaches rarely scale: When the Eternal September rolls in, you tighten the reins or get swept away...

[Rochus]

> you tighten the reins or fold...

But don't tell me they will fold because they have an article about the Odin programming language. I rather think people will vote with their feet once more when they hear for what silly reasons it was deleted.

[cygx]

But don't tell me they will fold because they have an article about the Odin programming language.

Who should decide when to enforce the notability rules, and when to skirt them?

I rather think people will vote with their feet once more

Maybe, maybe not - they've stuck around for a quarter century already...