Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPA2

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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IPA2

The article describes yet another suggested system for transcribing Persian into the Latin script. The article is created by the person who has suggested the system (Moslehi). A Google search [1] doesn't give much about this certain "IPA2" apart from Wikipedia, its mirrors, and its IPA2's homepage. roozbeh 13:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep I disagree with the nomination for deletion. I have my own concerns:
  1. What do you mean by YET ANOTHER; as long as I know, there are only 2 main systems suggested for Persian alphabet: UniPers and IPA2. Can you name others which are of great noticeability?
  2. IPA2 is not used for TRANSCRIBING Persian into the LATIN SCRIPT. IPA2 is an alphabet proposed officially to REPLACE Perso-Arabic and not to TRANSCRIBE it. I used official, because an introduction to this alphabet is officially printed in proceedings of a linguistic conference held by a reputable Iranian university. I could acquire a copy and I recommend you doing the same.
  3. I see no problem in the articles being created by RESPONSIBLE people. I am concerned about your point as it may lead to misleading actions to avoid your accusation, such as choosing an ID which does not show the real identity of the author. I really appreciate those people who are honest enough to show their real identity freely and without any concerns caused by people like you who are discouragingly manipulating other people's works here on Wikipedia.
  4. IPA2 is a general abbreviation which can stand for many full names. Pls narrow your search by adding extra info or trying other combinations. I found some with LinguistList and Iran-Daily and ProZ. They contain info which may have been created by the same person in question. But there are resources. Besides, I do not expect much from search engines for the system is new enough not to be discussed about more than it is.
  5. I also searched for your name and activities. You seem to be a biased person on this issue because you are one of the people invovled in developing a Farsi (Persian) Linux for the Iranian government. Iranian government as been againt any alphabet change and so are the people participating in Farsi Linux project who are in favour of Perso-Arabic script in use.
  6. Finally, a personal question: how many articles are there which are created by you about you and about your own projects. Do you nominate them for deletion? and how many other people are there in your camp? -Persiciser, 17:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Just to emphasize that some parts of this is a personal attack towards me. I am not involved in developing FarsiLinux, and I do not remember creating any article created by me about my projects or myself. I don't care about a switch to the Latin script either. roozbeh 18:02, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Sorry! But I did not mean to attack you! Cos I do not know you! That was just a result of my searches with Google. About your not being involved, here are some counter-evidence cases:
      1. [2]
      2. [3]
      • Sorry, Persiciser! Would you pls announce your vote by adding a boldface vote at the beginning; otherwise, your vote will not be counted. -DrMoslehi 21:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC+3:30)
        • Well... just did it! I really did not know that. Can you give me the source or guide for how to vote and/or what the styleguide says? -Persiciser, 23:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Orthography reform or replacement is a matter of interest. Perhaps this article could me merged with UniPers as Latin orthographies for Persian. -- Evertype·✆ 18:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination details. --Drahcir^{my talk} 19:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral In IPA2: Eqdámiy nájavánmardáne bud vali bitaraf mi mánam. In English: It was not a fair act, but I keep neutral. -DrMoslehi 00:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC+3:30)
• Weak keep as per Evertype. ColinFine 23:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak KeepI don't think this article should be deleted. I think the article is informative and should not be deleted. What can happen if Wikipedia has one more article?? The author must've worked hard to write this article. Why should we delete this article and waste all the time he spent finding information on the article .etc? Also I agree with Evertype--GreatShash 03:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • GreatShash: Please don't SHOUT! It doesn't make your argument any stronger. Nor does an appeal to feelings. As you may see, I have alredy proposed that the article should be kept, albeit weakly. But your contribution tells us only that you think it should not be deleted: you do not say why. Please look at WP:AfD#How to discuss an AfD/Wikietiquette ColinFine 10:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • "How would you feel if your articles began to get listed for deletion?" — The very first article that I ever created here was nominated for deletion. I read the policies and guidelines, made a case based upon them, and the article was kept. Uncle G 12:11, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • GreatShash, thank you for improving your contribution above (though editing it in place makes my reply, and that of Uncle G, look incoherent: I would prefer if you had added a new comment). But you are still not advancing an argument relevant to Wikipedia. Please look again at WP:AfD#How to discuss an AfD/Wikietiquette. The issue is whether the article meets the requirements of Wikipedia, not how much work went into it. As I said, I have already supported keeping the article, but your non-arguments (especially since the author of the article has asked you on your talk page to contribute to this debate) do not push the discussion forward. If it were a popularity vote, your sycophantic response to DrMoslehi's request would make me change my recommendation to delete - but it isn't, and I continue to recommend weak keep on the article's merits. ColinFine 12:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry, ColinFine! I edited your bold tags and changed them to Italic because the BOT parser would count the bold votes as original votes. -DrMoslehi 21:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC+3:30)
    • Are you sure? I've no particular objection, but I can't find any evidence that votes are counted by a bot. WP:AfD#How to discuss an AfD/Wikietiquette says 'Usually editors recommend a course of action in bold text, e.g., "Keep" or "Delete"', which definitely does not suggest that counting is done by a bot. I've had a quick look at the AfD Talk page, and there is certainly some discussion about using a bot to close discussions, but I didn't find any resolution. ColinFine 19:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

AfD is not a vote. - FrancisTyers · 23:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep – Maybe primary author could explain IPA2's significance within the article (eg. why linguistically it is claimed to be most accurate alphabet for Persian language), its current usage & PLA classes, why specifically it's controversial, IPA equivalents in table and 'Examples of usage' section, English gloss in 'Example of usage' section, etc. –jonsafari 23:32, 18 September 2006 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.