Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinala language

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 delete --JForget 01:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vinala language

Vinala language (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Contested prod. Pure and utter bollocks. The original author obviously made this up, as there are absolutely no relevant Google hits about this subject, aside from this article. Should've been speedied as nonsense, in retrospect, but it looked too convincing at first. (Note: Companion article Vinala is up for speedy.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 15:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as non-notable, possibly non-existent language. Google kept sending me to sites with "vanilla" in them. (Also, I've redirected Vinala to Vinala language because it was essentially the same thing.) ... discospinster _talk 16:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
• speedy delete as nonsense. Someone did spend some time thinking about it though, and I did find the "reta(red)" amusing though. I need to get a life. StephenBuxton (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

comment Definitily made up - look at the opening line of this version of Vinala. StephenBuxton (talk) 16:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete: This isn't a speedy candidate - it isn't patent nonsense - but it is a WP:HOAX violation, pure and simple. Toss in WP:BULLSHIT and you're all set.  RGTraynor  16:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as a hoax. Nsk92 (talk) 16:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete but not as hoax, but as a non-notable conlang. Not eligible for speedy, as not nonsense. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment It lacks notability (i.e., no references) which is not a good sign. But to call an aritcle a hoax when it clearly says itself to be an artificilially constructed language with 2 speakers suggests that all those saying something like WP:HOAX are on a witch hunt, making the AfD process look really BAD. --Firefly322 (talk) 22:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Reply: Oh, please. You can have an artificially-constructed language that is legitimate. This is not one, but the article represents that it is. It's a hoax. This isn't a witch hunt; we're just trying to clean the poop off the stable floor. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 23:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment Calling this article a hoax based upon 0 Ghits is a google witchhunt, which is very much something wikipolicy frowns upon. --Firefly322 (talk) 12:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. Whether it's a hoax or not is irrelevant, since, in either case, it's a non-notable constructed language. The low number of Google hits (in fact, exactly 0) lends credence to the idea that it's a hoax, however. nneonneo ^talk 23:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Oh yeah, and it's probably ripe for WP:SNOW, too, just eight hours after being opened. nneonneo ^talk 23:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable/hoax, as Google reveals information about the city, not the language. — Wenli ^{(reply here)} 02:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as a violation of WP:NFT more than WP:HOAX, at least if we're talking the version with the more honest explanation of the way this started. The one that made this look slightly more notable would be more of a hoax issue. Erechtheus (talk) 03:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Please do not delete this article for I am still in the process of a goal. Berbania (talk) 14:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Please allow me to make my goal for I have no website to place this on. Berbania (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
  • There are plenty of free webhosts out there, and plenty more which are very inexpensive. Wikipedia is not the place for articles that you have made up, but which have not achieved notability. See also Wikipedia is not a free webhost. nneonneo ^talk 15:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• you may delete my article in 3 days now. Berbania (talk) 17:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• please let me to save my work for my own needs though please! Berbania (talk) 17:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
  • One thing you can consider is putting your work on a wiki host such as BluWiki or ScribbleWiki, where users can add pages with anything they like (so long as it isn't illegal). That way, you can continue to use a wiki format. If you decide to do this, add {{db-author}} to the top of Vinala and Vinala language, so we can close this debate after you've saved your work. nneonneo ^talk 17:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, nn conlang. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Stifle (talk) 18:41, 14 May 2008 (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.