User talk:Corbin/Spring cleaning

+1. I'd ban constant languages too, as well as majority of joke languages. But probably I'm too radical. --Blashyrkh (talk) 04:49, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree on (some) constant languages, bot joke languages make sense for esolangs, remov9ng all of them would be way too much IMO. --Yayimhere2(school) (talk) 04:51, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I think removing at least a significant chunk of them would still be good dragon eater SIX SEVEN 07:02, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

But what joke languages would be kept and what would be removed/relocated? Of course, old or notable ones like HQ9+ and deadfish can stay, and I'm assuming trivial substitutions of languages cannot (at least based on the discussion of trivial BF substitutions), but what about variants/families of joke languages? RaiseAfloppaFan3925 【My　トーコページ・私の投稿】【You're　かっこいい、remember that.】 04:21, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

what about trivial brainfuck substitutions? —aadenboy (talk|contribs) 13:42, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

We've discussed requiring all TBSs to be listed at trivial brainfuck substitution instead of getting their own page. Similarly, we could require that constant languages be listed at constant language. There isn't quite enough admin buy-in on this though. Corbin (talk) 16:11, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

all blank pages [0 bytes] [1] should also be reviewed to decide if they should be ridded of (most of them were blanked by their creators and have since been abandoned) -- somefan (talk | contribs) 05:23, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

Generally, I think that all of these changes are good! dragon eater SIX SEVEN 07:22, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree with all of these —aadenboy (talk|contribs) 13:42, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

thought: it might be worth moving some of the pages (i.e all of the -complete articles) to be a subpage of the user's userpage) then removing the redirect rather than deleting them outright; such a tactic has been used in other wikis I participate in —aadenboy (talk|contribs) 17:37, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

I think these changes would also be good. (except existing esolangs in violation should probably just be moved as a subpage of their creator instead of being deleted.) For user-edited esolangs though, I think they still deserve to stay on this wiki, but they should not exist ONLY on this wiki. Maybe they could be migrated offsite (like to a remote Git or other VCS repository) instead, which allows the language to keep existing. For the page though, I guess it could be like any other article, except I guess there could be a little note saying that you can open a PR to add stuff or something. --(this comment by RaiseAfloppaFan3925 at 13:32, 26 March 2026 UTC; please sign your comments with ~~~~)

I do not like this idea

I feel like this goes a little too overboard. Trivial BF substitutions and constant language pages should not be deleted, as those are still esolangs. For user-edited esolangs, I do not see anything wrong with those and I have no idea why they’re considered “social media-style usage” or whatever. If you really want the admins to go with this, just ask them to “freeze” them permanently by protecting their pages and adding a notice to the start of each page instead of outright deleting them. For AI generation, I think AI-generated languages should be allowed, but not using AI to write articles for this site, and that anything that’s AI-generated must be explicitly labelled as such. hotcrystal0 21:02, 25 March 2026 (UTC)

The user-edited-language articles are not about languages, they're about projects which might produce languages. The project is hosted directly in the article. This goes against the explicit goals of the admins to avoid the wiki even appearing to be a social-media site; if you want, you can come to IRC and ask about details. We don't want these projects to stop existing, we want them to go find proper hosting on a free git forge.

Generative chatbots ("AI") can't be used to write articles because chatbots can't be authors for purposes of ensuring that contributions are public-domain or equivalent; see esolang:copyrights for the full statement. This is settled law in the USA; look up Naruto v. Slater for the idea that only humans can be authors for purpose of holding copyright and Thaler v. Perlmutter for disqualifying autoregressive generative tools in particular. Chatbot-generated languages would be fine if they were interesting. Corbin (talk) 05:34, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Why do you consider user-edited esolangs as “projects disguised as esolangs”? To me that doesn’t make sense. hotcrystal0 12:40, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, I have created my own proposal at User:Hotcrystal0/Hc0's spring cleaning proposal. hotcrystal0 13:33, 26 March 2026 (UTC)