2,963
edits
APL Wiki:Content guidelines: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Due weight: Reverse Compose is not as obscure as it used to be; switch to Case
(→What is APL?: Try to avoid implying non-APL array languages shouldn't be documented) |
m (→Due weight: Reverse Compose is not as obscure as it used to be; switch to Case) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
== Due weight == | == Due weight == | ||
Because the [[#What is APL?|definition]] of APL is not rigorous (a particular language may be more or less APL-like), the notability guidelines above can be interpreted more strictly or more loosely. To determine whether content belongs on the APL Wiki at all, a loose interpretation is better. For determining how content is presented, however, editors should consider not just whether a topic is related to APL but how closely related, or central to APL, it is. Even a recent and niche development like [[ | Because the [[#What is APL?|definition]] of APL is not rigorous (a particular language may be more or less APL-like), the notability guidelines above can be interpreted more strictly or more loosely. To determine whether content belongs on the APL Wiki at all, a loose interpretation is better. For determining how content is presented, however, editors should consider not just whether a topic is related to APL but how closely related, or central to APL, it is. Even a recent and niche development like [[Case]] has a place in the Wiki, but most information about the primitive should remain on its own page and mentions on more central pages should be qualified in order to make it clear the primitive is not available in most APLs. In contrast, a topic like [[Outer Product]] can be mentioned anywhere, and omitting it from related articles like [[Inner Product]] or [[Each]] would be a mistake in emphasis. | ||
To be central to the concept of APL, a language needs '''adherence''' to APL principles and '''prominence''' in terms of its user base or in the APL community. This is a modification of Wikipedia's [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight|due and undue weight]] policy, which relies on prominence alone. Adherence is measured roughly by the definitions in [[#What is APL?]]: languages that satisfy more of these definitions, and more closely, adhere better to the concept of APL. Prominence is determined by how many people use a language, how many of these are part of the APL community, and how strong an influence the language has had on the development of APL. | To be central to the concept of APL, a language needs '''adherence''' to APL principles and '''prominence''' in terms of its user base or in the APL community. This is a modification of Wikipedia's [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight|due and undue weight]] policy, which relies on prominence alone. Adherence is measured roughly by the definitions in [[#What is APL?]]: languages that satisfy more of these definitions, and more closely, adhere better to the concept of APL. Prominence is determined by how many people use a language, how many of these are part of the APL community, and how strong an influence the language has had on the development of APL. | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
Keep in mind that many APL users are not very visible to the outside world and don't publish anything about their usage (especially after the decline of the [[APL conference]]). For example, you are unlikely to see recent material about [[APL2]], but it is still widely used, and it's reasonable to think these users will look to the APL Wiki as a resource. As an editor you aren't expected to know every prominent language in order to contribute, but please think twice before removing material about a language you don't think is prominent. Evidence that the language is still in use might include major companies using it, active support forums, or significant development on the language indicating that it makes enough revenue to support this development. Significant historical use is also a sign, as usage of a particular APL rarely dies out quickly. | Keep in mind that many APL users are not very visible to the outside world and don't publish anything about their usage (especially after the decline of the [[APL conference]]). For example, you are unlikely to see recent material about [[APL2]], but it is still widely used, and it's reasonable to think these users will look to the APL Wiki as a resource. As an editor you aren't expected to know every prominent language in order to contribute, but please think twice before removing material about a language you don't think is prominent. Evidence that the language is still in use might include major companies using it, active support forums, or significant development on the language indicating that it makes enough revenue to support this development. Significant historical use is also a sign, as usage of a particular APL rarely dies out quickly. | ||
A language can be prominent even if it is very rarely used, or in extreme cases never implemented. This is the case for research languages that are important in developing features later picked up by more prominent APLs. For example, [[ | A language can be prominent even if it is very rarely used, or in extreme cases never implemented. This is the case for research languages that are important in developing features later picked up by more prominent APLs. For example, [[Rationalized APL]], while only an incomplete description of how one APL might work, strongly influenced [[J]] and subsequently [[Dyalog APL]]. [[Extended Dyalog APL]], used infrequently in the [[code golf]] community, has also had a significant influence on [[Dyalog APL]]. The APL Wiki should include information about these languages because they will likely continue to influence APL's direction in the future. However, it's also important to make sure that this information, which is of theoretical interest, doesn't interfere with practical content. It should generally be placed lower in articles or sections of articles, and the text should make it clear that this material probably doesn't apply to the reader's APL of choice, usually by specifying which language or languages it is taken from. | ||
== Dialect-specific pages == | == Dialect-specific pages == | ||