Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Language of no

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was deleteno. – ABCDNO 19:30, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Block-compress errors. – ABCD 19:32, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Language of no

Yet another conlang, consisting entirely of appending "no" to all words. --fvw* 14:27, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

  • I believe this to be a speedy candidate. A non-existant language made up by a non-existant King of a non-existant country (who happens to have the same name as the author who signed the article). DJ Clayworth 14:38, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • Under what criterion from WP:CSD? --fvw* 14:39, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)
      • Patent nonsense. DJ Clayworth 14:40, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
        • Hmm? this patent nonsense? It's not random characters, so you claim you can't make heads or tails of it? The text is quite easy to parse, the fact that it's obviously untrue has no bearing on the patent nonsense issue. --fvw* 08:08, 2005 Jan 2 (UTC)
  • Delete as unencyclopedic. Someone's made-up "language", and not a particularly interesting one at that. May not be patent nonsense, if added in good faith. --MarkSweep 01:31, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I re-added this to the VFD page as it somehow got removed from there without a decision. DJ Clayworth 17:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Deleteno. Thisno isn'tno ano realno languageno. DaveTheRed 17:52, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Speedy would be better. Call it patent nonsense, vandalism, user test, hell it could be any of of those. Keeping here for a week or two on a technicality is pointless. -R. fiend 19:15, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, vanity conlang. —Korath (Talk) 19:55, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Deleteno thisno nonsenseno. Jayjg (talk) 20:29, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I thought this was the opposite of Canadian, eh? Anyway, delete, no? Chris 20:41, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Is this what conlangs have come to? Binadot 02:29, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable, vanity conlang. Megan1967 05:19, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. I agree with R. fiend. This is complete nonsense. — JIP | Talk 05:26, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.