Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Discworld 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 merge. Since this is a complex merge and I know little of this topic, I am just going to add merge tags. W.marsh 14:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discworld languages

Lacks real world notability, cannot be cited to meet WP:FICT, solely plot information from which no real world context can emerge Pilotbob 05:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletions. -- Pilotbob 05:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Anynobody 07:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, he ain't JRR Tolkien. Fee Fi Foe Fum 07:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It has to go. As has been said above, it's not like he sat down and created whole languages like JRR Tolkien.Alberon 10:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge a significantly cut down summary to a Languages section in the Discworld article. Pinball22 14:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge. I created this article to reorganise a lot of random information in the Discworld Wikipedia ___domain. Much of it was taken from other articles, and if it is to be deleted then that information should go back where it came from (Dwarf and Troll languages should go back to Dwarf (Discworld) and Troll (Discworld). Ook language (which this article was originally) should probably be merged with Librarian (Discworld). Not sure what to do about Latatian. Serendi^podous 14:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

delete. OK; I just reinstated most of the more important material back into its original articles. The rest can go. Serendi^podous 20:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per WP:FICT, probably per Pinball22's suggestion to a Language's section in Discworld. —Quasirandom 17:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge - I am leaning towards deletion at this stage due to the failure of the article meeting any of Wikipedia's key policies, namely verifiability and reliable sourcing. The latter meaning that the article doesn't cite a sufficient, number of [or quality] sources. However that is in my opinion. I would support a merge per the creating user's concern, however I am a little worried that if the creating user isn't sure of what to do, what do the community take into account when deciding a keep or delete? Rudget _{Contributions} 17:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as fancruft. The web is still out there, folks--not everything ahs to be on WP. JJL 18:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Even as a massive Pratchett fan, I can't see any point to having this Tx17777 21:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If merged, this article should be merged into Discworld (world), not Discworld. Significant difference there. 96T 21:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry about that! I was looking at Discworld (world) when I said that and then linked the wrong one. Pinball22 21:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge what can be merged. Not notable enough for an article, but it'd be a shame to lose any good information. faithless (^speak) 10:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per Pinball. Edward321 03:35, 14 November 2007 (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.