- 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. The weight of argument favors deletion, particularly since there doesn't appear to be certainty that this is even the correct name.--Kubigula (talk) 03:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Dedative case (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
The article is about an apparantly speculative case that appears in Quenya, a fictional Tolkien language. In the main article on Quenya, the word "dedative" occurs only in the description of an external link to an article that describes an "s-case". The article has been tagged as unreferenced since December 2007, and no . Even if a source would be found, I question the usefulness of having a separate article about a speculative, obscure case that supposedely exists in only one constructed language. A redirect to Quenya might be more useful. Peter Isotalo 14:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Article does not indicate any real-world significance of this fictional element. It also appears to be a neologism of dubious source. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep I just added a source that explains this fictional case, but there is indeed no other use than a speculative appearance in Tolkien's Quenya. De728631 (talk) 18:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd like to quote what the source you added has to say about this particular case.
- Tolkien did not identify this case by any name, nor have we ever seen it used in a text. Its function is therefore wholly unknown; it has indeed been called the Mystery Case. Some writers have used it simply as an alternative locative ending. They have had no nightly visits by Tolkien afterwards, so perhaps this is acceptable to him.
- It basically amounts to an obscure piece of conjecture among die-hard Quenya aficionados. How is that worthy of a separate article? Peter Isotalo 14:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd like to quote what the source you added has to say about this particular case.
- That's why I only suggested a "weak" keep. On a second thought this might as well be merged into the main Quenya article as a sidenote. De728631 (talk) 15:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Possible candidate for a merge with comitative case or adessive case, which seems to be much the same thing. As far as I can see, this seems to be a neologism invented by deep Tolkien language fans, who unsurprisingly did not know the semi-established terminology for the phenomenon. Whether it's notable enough to actually appear there may be debatable, but not an AfD matter. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as a strong Tolkien fan: how is this source a reliable source for this kind of thing? If Tolkien himself didn't use this name (or any other for such a case), how can we know whether this is the correct name, or if there is a correct name? This is like Victoire Weasley in that part of the name (in this situation the name of the case, in Victoire's case her last name) is speculation. Nyttend (talk) 21:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Fauskanger is one of the few reliable Tolkien linguists, and a professional linguist at that. Read more on his motivation. De728631 (talk) 23:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Source reliability isn't the main concern here; it's the rather obvious triviality and lack of real-world relevance of the topic.
- Peter Isotalo 06:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ffm 21:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, merge into Quenya and with comitative case and/or adessive case as Smerdis suggested above. De728631 (talk) 09:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. —Angr 12:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Simple delete without merging anything. No merge to Quenya since there's no indication Tolkien intended the case to be called by this name. No merge to real-life cases like comitative and adessive because they're not fictional and this is. (At least there's no Category:Fictional grammatical cases that needs to be deleted too.) —Angr 12:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Ningauble. No real-world notability. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 12 September 2008 (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.