|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|Sources for development of this article may be located at|
|This article has been mentioned in case law.
The citation is in: SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd,  EWHC 1829 (High Court of England and Wales, Chancery Division 2010-07-23) I am comforted by the fact that this assessment coincides not only with SAS Institute's own assessment in paragraph 6 of its Particulars of Claim and in its literature, but also with that of the anonymous author of the entry for "SAS language" in Wikipedia (as last modified on 25 April 2010. Link.
That redirect goes to an excellent discussion of SAS called: SAS_System. In the talk page it clearly points out that there is no "SAS Language." The article here appears to be very rudimentary and does not indicate a grasp of the spectrum of the SAS_System. One wonders why it was added as it adds no new information. --Statprof (talk) 21:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
It is emerging that the language of SAS and the SAS System are different entities, one has copyright protection, and the other does not. Therefore having a separate page for the language makes sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 21:57, 17 December 2011 (UTC) +1 Spdegabrielle (talk) 15:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Just to let you guys know, this article was cited in the English case SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd (2010 judgment), where the judge relied on the definition of "SAS language" in the 25 April 2010 version of this article. Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a court source has more details. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 08:40, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
I just looked over this page, and it is almost completely unsourced, and has been tagged as such for 11 months. I am going to be WP:BOLD and remove any material that violates WP:V. I invite anyone to start building it back up again, but you have to have citations to reliable sources for anything added. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)