Talk:OOPSLA

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Computing: Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

Too much Triviality

I think the article includes too much triviality:

Like other conferences, OOPSLA offers various tracks and many simultaneous sessions, and thus has different meaning to different people.

If a sentence starts with "like other conferences", then this information is redundant.

It is more academic than some conferences, with doctoral students presenting papers for credit, and less academic than others.

Is this true? Is this interesting?

I've never heared that doctoral students get credit for presenting papers at OOPLSA

OOPSLA’s venue changes every year, and the categories of its program vary.

This is true for almost all conferences. Hence, there is no need to mention this.

Historically OOPSLA has combined the presentation of academic papers with comparatively practical experience reports, panels, workshops and tutorials.

This is also true for almost all conferences.

OOPSLA helped object-oriented programming develop into what is now mainstream programming

I can't imagine that OOPSLA helped OO development to become mainstream. If this is true, then please add this information also to the OOP article http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Object-Oriented_Programming

71.131.214.2 (talk) 21:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1. The main statement about OOPSLA should be that its

intent was to provide an annual conference which

specifically catered for the OOP paradigm.

2. The date of the first OOPSLA (1986) should be framed in

terms of a surge of key activity in the OOP field in the 12

months prior/around (interest in OOP in academia/industry was

reaching a "critical mass" ) :

- public release of C++ [1985]

- the book by Brad J Cox on Objective-C [1986]

- public release of Eiffel [1986]

- the inception of a working group to create

a standard OOP extension for Lisp (using

existing systems such as LOOPS and Flavors

to drive what would eventually become CLOS) [1986] 2A02:C7C:3764:B500:E8F2:C475:7D63:14EF (talk) 19:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both links redirect to the same link

These two external links http://www.splashcon.org and http://oopsla.org both redirect to https://2018.splashcon.org/. Do both need to be kept? ----Bernburgerin (talk) 15:14, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A wayback link of the old site would seem appropriate. Widefox; talk 10:23, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wayback link is not an appropriate focus. Both organizations are conference based. Since OOPSLA is within SPLASH, but still its own self-identity, the oopsla.org site is retained for internet access by that name. And splashcon.org is conference focused, so it always redirects to the most current conference, and provides a drop-down menu to access older conferences. WurmWoode^T 17:06, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]