Talk:Java (programming language)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured articleJava (programming language) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 17, 2005.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 23, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
June 24, 2005Featured article reviewKept
July 25, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
August 8, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
June 15, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 23, 2004.
Current status: Former featured article

Versions?[edit]

This article has a section on 'editions' (SE, ME, etc). But nothing on the differences between versions. Java 1.7 (and 1.8, though not yet finalized) is in some ways quite a different languages from 1.0. Does anyone think there ought to be a 'Versions' section with brief notes on the main changes (or perhaps just the language changes) in each version? These could include links to information on the relevant topic elsewhere on WP.

"Java (programming langauge)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Java (programming langauge). Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 18:27, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of version history[edit]

There was a discussion for the deletion of the Java version history article (linked in this article) here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Java version history. I still don't see why the article was deleted as it was not a speedy deletion process and the result of the discussion was not delete (to be fair, there was only one Delete by the one who asked for deletion, and two Keep). Furthermore, now:

  • there is hardly any history at all (for a major programming language)
  • there is still absolutely no explanation as what must be put in this kind of version history languages
  • 'all other major languages have the same articles with the same version history articles (and with the same content, which should be tagged for deletion also if this one was deleted). For example: .NET Framework version history , Qt version history, the Ruby history, the version table for Python, the Google Chrome version history, the Firefox version history, etc... If we delete this article, we should delete all of them them too (they have exactly the same "problems")

I ask here because it is not possible to ask why it was deleted on the talk page of the admin who deleted the page, nor the talk page of the deleted page (the latter is what is proposed on the deletion review, but the talk page do not exist anymore, of course). The result is that now the only history for this language is here: Java_(programming_language)#Versions, which is bordering ridiculous. This process suck. Hervegirod (talk) 07:18, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

It still exists on archive.org. I don't remember any delete request warning being posted. Someone should investigate this mess. • SbmeirowTalk • 07:39, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
I added an OR tag to this article Versions section. At least maybe people will try to help. The discussion on the Java version history article deletion here seems to go nowhere. Hervegirod (talk) 10:57, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose to merge Java version history into Java (programming language)#Versions. I see this as the natural follow up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Java version history which was recently closed as keep. There is important information on Java version history, but the state of reliable sources about the subject remains unclear. Modernponderer helpfully linked to some sources at the deletion discussion, and I believe those sources are an excellent reason to include this information here, but I still don't see the logic in maintaining version history as a separate article. None of the sources provided are about Java version history, they're about modifications to the Java programming language that were made with each new version; precisely the type of information that belongs in the the history section of this article. That's an important distinction that wasn't stressed enough in the deletion discussion. Java version history as it exists now is just too much of a violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY, with far too little notability of the subject itself, to qualify for an individual article, and the series of keep per x votes with little or no explanation following the relisting, don't change that. --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 16:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Vote NO MERGE - only because this is being used as an alternate way to delete the "Java version history" article right after it was voted down. • SbmeirowTalk • 17:33, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

"[V]oted down" is too strong. Deletion discussions are supposed to seek WP:CONSENSUS, rather than count votes. The discussion was relisted due to lack of consensus, and nothing changed. Nearly every subsequent edit fell under the category of WP:NOTARG. The discussion, which was closed by a non-sysop, should have been closed as no consensus or else left for a more experienced sysop to close. Ordinarily, this would warrant renomination, but seeing as I don't actually agree with the nom that it warrants deletion, I am seeking consensus about a merger instead. --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 18:44, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
no merge This article is already long enough. --Salix alba (talk): 21:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
no merge Agree, this article is already long enough. peterl (talk) 06:22, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Speedy close as the proposal would be in gross violation of WP:SIZERULE – unless of course this would actually be an end run around the recent deletion discussion as has already been suspected here, with the vast majority of the article in question's content being removed. Modernponderer (talk) 01:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
no merge I agree this seems like someone trying to weasel around the earlier deletion being shotdown. *IF* I were to even entertain this idea (and it totally violates several things including WP:SIZERULE), I would rather see it merged in the other direction where the Java language history is merged into the larger Java platform history. Merging the platform history into the language history seems like a good way to subsequently remove the platform history as it would no longer be on topic after the merge and could be removed over time. —Uzume (talk) 14:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
No merge this is pretty obviously too long to belong on the main page unless the information is shortened greatly, which I think would be a mistake. 172.73.179.154 (talk) 15:59, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
If you people are going to merge, kindly merge all contents. As belong to java world, this page is really helpful for us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.61.65 (talk) 10:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)