[DiogenesKynikos]

Publishing retractions is a sign of reliability. Wikipedia is actually more concerned about sources that don't publish retractions.

If Odin is so notable, why haven't any of the normal tech publications ever mentioned it? One company using it does not necessarily make it notable.

> Remember, CNN and all the "trusted" news outlets also have YouTube accounts.

And those YouTube accounts are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia. In fact, basically only CNN's published articles are considered reliable.

[dismalaf]

> the normal tech publications

Name 1 "normal tech publication" that anyone reads that covers programming languages.

[DiogenesKynikos]

This took me approximately two seconds to find: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/02/linux-leaders-pave-a...

[dismalaf]

A gossip article about Linux, Linus and Rust? You're not selling it...

[DiogenesKynikos]

I gave you the first search result. There are probably tens of thousands of articles in newspapers and magazines about Rust, along with probably hundreds of published books. Unlike Odin, Rust is notable and heavily covered by secondary sources.

[dismalaf]

If it's so easy to find why did you choose gossip? Take the second hit or third if it's all so technical. But it's not. It's all garbage gossip because Ars Technica is a garbage site, it's like TMZ for nerds.

As for books...

https://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Odin-Programming-Langua...

[DiogenesKynikos]

Is your position that all coverage of Rust is gossip? That's just not a tenable position.

By the way, the article I linked to discusses the history of Rust in the Linux kernel, which is hardly gossip and illustrates why Rust is notable.

You've finally found a better source than YouTube for Odin. Whether it meets Wikipedia's standards will probably depend on whether it's self-published.