278:
The X# the deletion proposal above is referring to is a new project that does not bear any resemblance to the programming language that is the subject of this article. I am of the opinion that the overall structure of the article is good and provides basic information on the characteristics of the
340:
You don't believe that there are reliable sources discussing X# in detail. What about the official source code I mentioned above, which defines exactly how the language behaves? There is nothing more reliable and descriptive when it comes to computer programs. I consider it to be a bit strange to
519:
We put a lot of effort on write this page in the hope too to get more interest on Cosmos and X# itself if you remove it this chance is lost (and so the fact that there are not external sources regarding X# will aggravate), if you want to open the article on the other X# cannot simply add a
468:
Firstly, this deletion discussion is about the Cosmos component, not the xBase library. I simply brought that up as the xBase library appears to be better known, and I didn't want people to confuse the two. Secondly, nobody is disputing that X# exists. Finally, please review
310:. What's needed to keep the article are reliable sources discussing the topic in detail. I don't believe those sources exist and without the sources to demonstrate notability, the article must go, no matter how "useful". For more on how to contribute to an AfD, please read
473:. If X# hasn't been the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources (e.g. books, academic journals, magazines) then it's not notable by Knowledge (XXG)'s standards. It might become notable in the future, but it's not there yet.
411:
Good morning I'm one of the Cosmos developers and I can ensure you that indeed X# does exists! We use it daily... I can admit that Cosmos has a "marketing" problem having only a GitHub website and so yes the only other source of X# is our
690:, a lot of sound and noise but not a lot of attention from anyone who isn't involved with the project. How can a neutral encyclopaedic article be written without sources from those who are not a part of the "Cosmos Team"? Does not meet
348:, I think that the description "Unable to find sources" doesn't mirror any current problem. What further action would need to be taken in order to emphasize this fact (e. g. adding citations, more pointers to the COSMOS article...)?
272:
project. COSMOS, a popular platform for building custom operating systems, uses X# primarily for writing snippets of native code that are called when a low-level snippet or program critical on performance needs to be
487:
One more thing: when challenging deletion, many editors try to find other articles on
Knowledge (XXG) which they feel are similar to the one nominated for deletion, and say "what about these pages?". Please review
166:
613:. We have a fairly technical set of guidelines by which we decide whether to keep pages, so it's helpful to familiarize yourself with those guidelines when formulating your arguments at an AfD.
663:
from independent sources. Wholly sourced from "Cosmos team", who seemingly swooped into this discussion perform damage control. Quick scan leaves me w/ impression eligible for
119:
671:
Reassurances from the people who stand to benefit from the article staying in terms of free advertising fail to reassure me that this is anything but blatant advertising.
636:
341:
point out to a lack of sources and simultaneously categorize calling in the X# developers as canvassing, since it's them who, if no one else, could provide those sources.
492:
before following that path. If you want this article to be kept, the surest route is to find significant coverage in independent reliable sources, per the policies at
388:
must discuss it in depth and do it in reliable sources. You don't have that. The code for X# was (obviously) written by the people who invented it. That makes it
160:
344:
Let us turn this constructive - since it has already been proven that X# is a thing while not being related to xBase, and that this article is based on the
218:
A number of sources have since been added, but all are primary and/or self-published as discussed below, still leaving us with nothing to establish
378:
multiple independent secondary sources discussing the subject in detail in reliable sources with reputation for fact-checking and editorial control
200:
Googling and searching also at Amazon, I expected but was not even able to find the usual how-to programming books on the topic. Clearly fails
126:
17:
565:
376:
Sorry, I had hoped you'd read the sections of our guidelines to which I provided links. To establish notability requires
718:
40:
535:
453:
181:
92:
87:
514:
I add some external pages that talk of X#: Channel 9 interview of the lead developer of Cosmos: Article on
Codeplex:
148:
96:
586:
269:
244:. Unable to find sources. There seems to be another product with the same name which is a .NET library based on
79:
677:
602:
594:
523:
489:
307:
219:
578:
142:
714:
669:"We put a lot of effort on write this page in the hope too to get more interest on Cosmos and X# itself"
417:
345:
265:
36:
672:
598:
590:
554:
531:
449:
432:
606:
582:
389:
138:
174:
698:
682:
648:
622:
539:
505:
482:
457:
436:
359:
351:
327:
297:
289:
257:
235:
213:
83:
61:
279:
language, which is useful not only for the developers looking up the language for the first time.
527:
445:
428:
188:
644:
618:
397:
355:
323:
293:
231:
209:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
713:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
566:
https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/220076/Csharp-Open-Source-Managed-Operating-System-Intro
75:
67:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
501:
478:
253:
198:
Lacks even a single reliable source to establish anything whatsoever, never mind notability.
57:
691:
664:
610:
493:
470:
381:
315:
311:
223:
201:
660:
695:
154:
640:
614:
393:
319:
227:
205:
113:
497:
474:
380:. Each of those words means something here on Knowledge (XXG), as explained in
249:
53:
425:
P.S. The other X# is using the same name but it is not the same thing.
422:
Let me know if you need anything to avoid the deletion of the article.
418:
https://github.com/CosmosOS/Cosmos/tree/master/source/XSharp.Compiler
555:
https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/On-NET/Chad-Z-Hower-aka-Kudzu-Cosmos
581:
with the the developer talking about his own stuff. That makes it
245:
707:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
384:. Basically, the essence of notability is that other people
597:. Re: your other arguments, please consider the advice at
109:
105:
101:
173:
187:
659:thrilled to know the thing exists. Does not have
392:, meaning it does not contribute to notability.
264:The article was originally based directly on the
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
721:). No further edits should be made to this page.
585:. Your second source appears to be a blog on a
306:Please do not "notify" anyone. That's called
637:list of Software-related deletion discussions
8:
635:Note: This debate has been included in the
634:
521:
444:: An editor has expressed a concern that
547:
589:site. That's secondary, but it's not
284:I have notified the COSMOS developers.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
667:. To quote from company rep above,
24:
593:. Neither of these count toward
346:publicly-available source code
1:
386:not connected to the subject
738:
649:19:13, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
623:20:58, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
540:18:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
506:15:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
483:13:21, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
437:09:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
360:10:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
328:09:03, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
298:07:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
258:22:03, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
236:19:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
214:21:57, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
710:Please do not modify it.
577:Your first source is an
32:Please do not modify it.
699:04:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
683:02:49, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
62:05:25, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
460:to this discussion.
266:relevant source code
651:
542:
526:comment added by
520:disambiguation?
461:
729:
712:
680:
675:
587:WP:USERGENERATED
568:
563:
557:
552:
439:
192:
191:
177:
129:
117:
99:
34:
737:
736:
732:
731:
730:
728:
727:
726:
725:
719:deletion review
708:
678:
673:
572:
571:
564:
560:
553:
549:
199:
134:
125:
90:
74:
71:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
735:
733:
724:
723:
703:
702:
685:
653:
652:
630:
628:
627:
626:
625:
570:
569:
558:
546:
545:
544:
543:
516:
515:
511:
510:
509:
508:
485:
463:
462:
426:
423:
420:
414:
413:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
349:
342:
333:
332:
331:
330:
301:
300:
286:
285:
281:
280:
275:
274:
261:
260:
197:
195:
194:
131:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
734:
722:
720:
716:
711:
705:
704:
700:
697:
693:
689:
686:
684:
681:
676:
670:
666:
662:
658:
655:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
633:
632:
631:
624:
620:
616:
612:
609:. Then read
608:
604:
603:WP:PLEASEDONT
600:
596:
595:WP:Notability
592:
588:
584:
580:
576:
575:
574:
573:
567:
562:
559:
556:
551:
548:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
518:
517:
513:
512:
507:
503:
499:
495:
491:
490:WP:OTHERSTUFF
486:
484:
480:
476:
472:
467:
466:
465:
464:
459:
455:
451:
447:
443:
438:
434:
430:
427:
424:
421:
419:
416:
415:
410:
409:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
374:
373:
372:
371:
370:
369:
368:
361:
357:
353:
350:
347:
343:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
329:
325:
321:
317:
313:
309:
308:WP:CANVASSING
305:
304:
303:
302:
299:
295:
291:
288:
287:
283:
282:
277:
276:
271:
267:
263:
262:
259:
255:
251:
247:
243:
240:
239:
238:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
220:WP:Notability
216:
215:
211:
207:
203:
190:
186:
183:
180:
176:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
140:
137:
136:Find sources:
132:
128:
124:
121:
115:
111:
107:
103:
98:
94:
89:
85:
81:
77:
73:
72:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
709:
706:
687:
668:
656:
629:
579:WP:INTERVIEW
561:
550:
522:— Preceding
441:
385:
377:
241:
217:
196:
184:
178:
170:
163:
157:
151:
145:
135:
122:
49:
47:
31:
28:
599:WP:HARDWORK
591:WP:RELIABLE
456:) has been
161:free images
665:WP:CSD#G11
607:WP:VALINFO
583:WP:PRIMARY
390:WP:PRIMARY
715:talk page
696:Lankiveil
679:cierekim
458:canvassed
273:executed.
37:talk page
717:or in a
536:contribs
524:unsigned
454:contribs
120:View log
39:or in a
641:Msnicki
615:Msnicki
394:Msnicki
352:FrewCen
320:Msnicki
290:FrewCen
268:of the
228:Msnicki
206:Msnicki
167:WP refs
155:scholar
93:protect
88:history
76:X Sharp
68:X Sharp
692:WP:GNG
688:Delete
657:delete
611:WP:GNG
498:Pburka
494:WP:GNG
475:Pburka
471:WP:GNG
382:WP:GNG
316:WP:ATA
312:WP:AFD
270:Cosmos
250:Pburka
242:Delete
224:WP:GNG
222:under
202:WP:GNG
139:Google
97:delete
54:Kurykh
50:delete
661:WP:RS
528:FanoI
446:FanoI
429:FanoI
412:code:
246:xBase
182:JSTOR
143:books
127:Stats
114:views
106:watch
102:links
16:<
674:Dloh
645:talk
619:talk
605:and
532:talk
502:talk
479:talk
450:talk
442:Note
433:talk
398:talk
356:talk
324:talk
314:and
294:talk
254:talk
232:talk
210:talk
175:FENS
149:news
110:logs
84:talk
80:edit
58:talk
318:.
226:.
189:TWL
118:– (
52:.
694:.
647:)
639:.
621:)
601:,
538:)
534:•
504:)
496:.
481:)
452:•
440:—
435:)
358:)
326:)
296:)
256:)
248:.
234:)
212:)
204:.
169:)
112:|
108:|
104:|
100:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
60:)
701:.
643:(
617:(
530:(
500:(
477:(
448:(
431:(
400:)
396:(
354:(
322:(
292:(
252:(
230:(
208:(
193:)
185:·
179:·
171:·
164:·
158:·
152:·
146:·
141:(
133:(
130:)
123:·
116:)
78:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.