Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asyiengarian 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 speedy delete. WP:MADEUP and WP:G3 Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Asyiengarian language

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unverifiable. Prod was contested by the original page contributor, who had previously removed an {{hoax}} tag with the following edit summary: "This is a unpublished and undisclosed language still in the planning stage and only immediate known by language directors and leading members of ASEAN Summit" The page contributor has evidently done a great deal of work on this article, and I appreciate their dedication and enthusiasm, but verifiability is one of the fundamental principles of Wikipedia and we simply cannot accept unpublished and unverifiable information in the encyclopedia. R'n'B (call me Russ) 01:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - No English-language Google hits outside of Wikipedia, but running a search for the Vietnamese translation pulled up a plausible page on the Vietmamese Wikipedia. So what might look like a hoax at a glance is probably not one. Carrite (talk) 02:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I didn't propose that it be deleted as a hoax. It is unverifiable by the author's own statement. And a page on the Vietnamese Wikipedia is no more reliable a source than this article unless it contains references to publication in reliable sources. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless some RS for its existence is produced. We don't even know if it's supposed to be Asyiengarian or Asiangarian (its name in the now-deleted section at Malay language). If ASEAN had made such a declaration, it would be in the news. And we have fake ISO codes, the claim that it's written in nearly moribund scripts, fake sources, and then some nonsense about this discussion having already been closed as 'keep'.

After claiming the grammar is European-based and completely unlike Malay, the Malay grammar article is then grafted on as a grammar section. There were two sources in that; one was left (a 2009 doc on Malay grammar in Malay), and the other was changed from M.B. Lewis, 1947, Teach Yourself Malay, §178 to B.J. Lanes, 2012, Asiangarian Language in Focus, §238. In other words, an obvious hoax, which I've tagged it as. — kwami (talk) 11:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unverified. And as likely hoax. --Merbabu (talk) 13:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.