The Third Manifesto and related articles deleted from Wikipedia.
I discovered today that The Third Manifesto, D Language Specification, and Tutorial D articles were recently removed from Wikipedia, presumably for being insufficiently notable. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Third_Manifesto.
There are presumably means to bring them back -- or at least request they be brought back -- assuming they meet the requisites for notability. Not being a Wikipedian, I'm not clear on either what constitutes notability or the process for demonstrating it post-deletion, though the link above does give clues.
The main cited reasons for the soft deletion are that the only cited references for those articles were works by the same authors, rather than by third parties, which fails Wikipedia's definitions of notability. That's sad but I don't really have a strong argument against it.
More important, however, is that the articles on Chris Date and Hugh Darwen themselves are still up, which is more important, and these could be expanded slightly with more details about The Third Manifesto as being significant work of theirs.
Thanks Darren.
So did no other textbook/industry 'expert' cite TTM? (Not counting Maurice Gittens.)
I'd say D&D's ideas are known 'around the traps' I hang out online, but that won't count for wp.
Addit: Ha! The first place I looked was wp on Null (SQL); and it cites TTM - not just D&D in general.
It's surely important (for 'balance' of the wp topic) that D&D have a coherent/complete approach and aren't merely grumpy about Null!
I'm not a Wikipedia expert but it seems simple enough to me. Someone (ideally D&D) undeletes those pages and scatters a few links to them across various other pages. Add a few comments why and we're done. A bot detected this, there's nothing malicious, they're just finding disconnected islands and assuming no-one cares. So care, already!
Quote from AntC on November 5, 2022, 3:14 amThanks Darren.
So did no other textbook/industry 'expert' cite TTM? (Not counting Maurice Gittens.)
I'd say D&D's ideas are known 'around the traps' I hang out online, but that won't count for wp.
Addit: Ha! The first place I looked was wp on Null (SQL); and it cites TTM - not just D&D in general.
It's surely important (for 'balance' of the wp topic) that D&D have a coherent/complete approach and aren't merely grumpy about Null!
I'm sure there must be a Ph.D. thesis somewhere that references our work.
Last time I looked at my own entry it seemed to have been significantly reduced. I've no idea who put it there in the first place. I had to make some corrections. At one time somebody was campaigning for it to be removed but a somebody else chipped in with support for retaining it. In editing it again today (to add a bridge book I published last year) I noticed that no. 12 in the list of references mentions Tutorial D.
Hugh