Deletion of Fantom (programming language)

Comment: So the sources as presently composed do not seem to support inclusion requirements for verifiability, reliability, notability,etc. That said, there seems to be at least 1 academic paper that may discuss it in more than passing (for those with academic access, it's behind the ACM paywall). There are also three articles about it that I would consider at the very least editorially independent, if not notable themselves. While I would never hold the software category overall to this standard, there does appear to be a book about it coming out, which could settle the debate. Overall, it's not a strong case, and very possibly a case of .  --Special:Contributions/69.204.153.39|69.204.153.39
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)