Deletion of C++ grammar

Comment: Totally unconvincing  by the nominator. Article is a legitimate content fork from C++ and can be easily cited to The C++ Programming Language|Stoustrup (or, for an alternative point of view, http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/ this) - well, maybe not ''all'' of it, but sufficient to keep the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:VAGUEWAVE)

Comment: The C++ language is notable subject, but I feel that we'd better off to integrate appropriate bits of this article into C++ or similar article and delete the rest. The article in its current state is so nonspecific that it's almost useless. Improving it is also not an option, I think, because a proper description of the C++ grammar would fall within . There's very little that can be said about the grammar except its definition in some grammar notation (say BNF) and how it is used, both of which are discouraged by the spirit of MANUAL. All in all, I believe an article about C++ grammar would be a very good entry in an appropriate Wikibook, but not here, in Wikipedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:NOTMANUAL)