The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was snow close. At best this is just something someone came up with WP:ONEDAY that has no relation to the computer language, but it's clear that this is not notable at this point in time. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bubble language (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Original research. Fails WP:GNG. - MrX 17:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This is OR. (Although according to Google Scholar there is such a thing as a bubble language in computer science, it's not this.) – Margin1522 (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete OR. Bazj (talk) 20:19, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above - Clearly OR. –Davey2010^Talk 23:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this as non-notable, sourced only from YouTube and Gaia Online (= internet forum). Interested editors may look into writing up for the combinatorics concept though. [1][2] 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 23:52, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.