Talk:Array map: Difference between revisions
→Proposed deletion: new section
(Perhaps there are pragmatic arguments for sooner rather than later) |
(→Proposed deletion: new section) |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 11:
::I agree that the silliness is more relevant that the evasiveness. My concern here is that we have been letting these silly junk tasks through, on the theory that anything which lends itself to easy and instant response can rationally be called "popular". Apparently we have somehow been confusing easy supply with eager demand and approbation :-) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 14:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
::Tho
::: Deletion is simple, it only becomes hard to delete a page if the page has purpose and is worthwhile. And if that happens, you can still delete junk from on the page itself.
::: As for beachheads - we've seen worse, and dealt with worse before. So I think we can afford to keep the response scaled to the size of the issue. And, for now and for this particular example, I think that that means: educate. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 04:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
: This page is worthless as is, so I have no objections to deletion. However, you could also just wait and see, or do pure wiki deletion, or improve it in a way that would be sensible; whatever seem to work best for you. The credentials of the account used to create this page are irrelevant to consider the worthfulness of the text of the page itself; the page has to stand by its own merits/demerits. --[[User:Zzo38|Zzo38]] ([[User talk:Zzo38|talk]]) 18:10, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
: In defence of the task... is there another task that specifically asks to '''map''' an array/list/vector? I see [[Fold]], I see [[Filter]], I don't see [[Map]]. --[[User:Tim-brown|Tim-brown]] ([[User talk:Tim-brown|talk]]) 06:37, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
:: I seem to see this mentioned in a few articles i've edited. I've just responded to the one on [[Talk:Array_search]]. Please reply to that post, if you think i've misunderstood the point of this site or you believe these articles, redirects and such that i've contributed are junk.
:: Now the fact that i'm using bugmenot is a different issue. Your attitude towards bugmenot shouldn't affect whether the content is usable or not. I can kinda see why you'd think it's a beachhead for spam, but as [[User:Rdm|Rdm]] said, any account can be created without e-mail verification and could just as well be beachhead accounts. --[[User:Bugmenot2|Bugmenot2]] ([[User talk:Bugmenot2|talk]]) 13:34, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
::: I have absolutely no means of knowing whether one sentence signed "BugMeNot" is written by the same author as another. Neither do I have the time or inclination to make the effort to find out. [[User:Rdm|Rdm]] has argued that such tags could conceivably be interpreted as representing a corporate or collective entity, but a weakness of that argument seems to me to be that there is no coherent institution, practice or process of delegation behind them. They have more in common with things randomly picked out of (and perhaps repeatedly returned to) trash cans in a public park. Anyone who wished to speak (and be replied to) in the voice or guise of a coherent and persistent 'person' or contributing institution would simply need to obtain their own username and password. [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 14:57, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
== draft task ==
Please see [[Rosetta_Code:Add_a_Task|Add a Task]] and if you are more generally interested, check out the "Ways to Contribute" column on the [http://rosettacode.org home page]. --
== Proposed deletion ==
When this page is deleted, we should probably link this page title with the apply a callback to an array page. Probably the best way to do that would be to make this page redirect there. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 18:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
| |||