Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castilian languages

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 redirect‎ to West Iberian languages. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:24, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Castilian languages

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article has been a stub for over a decade with the only two references being databases that seemingly only mention it in passing. There have been discussions on the article's talk page where editors have confirmed that basically no other resources use this term, and I wasn't able to find anything myself with Google.

Specifically, I propose it be redirected to West Iberian languages - no need for a merge since the material is basically already covered in that article. HappyWith (talk) 19:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Spain. HappyWith (talk) 19:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Please see the (rejected) marger discussion at Talk:West Iberian languages and the lengthy discussion at Talk:Castilian languages. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 19:30, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Both this article and West Iberian languages are marked as stubs. If certain sources like to invent these extra layers of classification that are not widely used, that can be discussed within a single article. (As a side note, this article's name is deeply misleading, as some people would assume that it refers to Spanish dialects and varieties given that Spanish is frequently called "Castilian" / castellano, and others would assume it refers to specifically sub-dialects of Castilian Spanish, excluding Latin American etc. varieties. Neither reasonable assumption would accurately match the content of this article. I would set that aside if this was a confusing but accepted term, but it really isn't, it's a rare term almost never seen in sources in this sense, by which I mean "printed books" and not Internet linguistics trees. Printed books that say this term just mean Dialects of Spanish.). SnowFire (talk) 20:19, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This discussion wouldn't be needed if WP didn't give so much credit to the Tree Model of languages. I don't see much merit in the Castilian languages group, but neither do I in Gallo-Romance, Ibero-Romance, etc. I reverted the conversion to redirect because it seemed to simply ignore all the previous discussions, though the havoc part was a bit exaggerated, yes. So if there is a sound consensus for the deletion, it'll be ok for me. One reason I see not to delete the page, however, is that someone might easily decide to create it again later. --Jotamar (talk) 21:05, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If someone went against the consensus and re-created it, we could just undo that or even salt the page if needed. HappyWith (talk) 00:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to West Iberian languages. The argument that this will be re-created if it were fully deleted is compelling. But it is simply a line in a taxonomy that isn't particularly important. Walt Yoder (talk) 00:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Spanish language per @SnowFire:. -- PK2 (talk) 03:35, 13 July 2023 (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.