Talk:Linguistic variety in Mauritius

Does this article give us anything that the Languages of Mauritius article doesn't?
Greetings, fellow Wikipedians! As the numerous tags at the top of the page indicate, there are a number of issues with this article: the tone and style are that of a personal opinion essay, the English is poor, and the citations are few and far between. Furthermore, we already have an article called Languages of Mauritius, which covers much of the same material, but in a coherent and efficient English free from the digressions and essayistic strategies employed in this "Linguistic variety" article. My question for you is: do we even need this article? Is there anything in this troubled article that isn't already covered—and more effectively at that—over at Languages of Mauritius? And if there is some salvageable material here, could it not be brought over to Languages of Mauritius, thusly rendering this article even more redundant? Tigercompanion25 (talk) 16:46, 10 October 2015 (UTC)