Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L'angwic

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete 6 delete, 1 keep. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 22:23, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] L'angwic

A conlang with no reported number of speakers and no Google hits at all (not even unrelated ones). I'm a bit sorry to have to nominate this, since it looks like the author has made quite an effort to write that... - ulayiti (talk) 22:23, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, nn conlang, article created by User:Langwic. Zoe 23:08, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, a good resource for people who want info on the conlang, I have also submitted the L'angwic Lessons site to Google many times for a long time and yet they still not have added it, that is not my fault. The wiki page is also still under construction. Langwic 23:13, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
  • You'll have to excuse us, but Wikipedia is not a place to promote a new conlang. If your conlang becomes popular, some time in the future, then somebody else will want to create this article and then we can judge it on its merits, not on the potential advertising this article is giving us. Zoe 23:25, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Not the place to declare this. Make a site if you want to promote this "language". NO speakers known.Kiwidude 23:52, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Article asserts non-notability through age and origin. Userfy and delete. -EDM 00:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. WP is not a repository for stuff that can't be publicized anywhere else. Has no speakers and no following, so has no article. -Splash 00:46, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Nele Jecewa zhalino Delete, per Zoe, Ulayiti. Dottore So 01:08, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nonnotable conlang. --Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 07:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Has small following, but not enough to keep. – AxSkov (☏) 10:37, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Just curious, what is your source for the assertion that this has a small following, rather than no following at all? Is there a non-Internet source that we can refer to for this information? Zoe 20:08, September 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Original research, promotion. "Developed by two linguistics majors in 2005, and is currently still under development." Wikipedia is not a vehicle for dissemination of new creations and new ideas, however worthy. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:13, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.