Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Differences between Thai, Lao and Isan


 * 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. EdJohnston (talk) 02:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Differences between Thai, Lao and Isan

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Unencyclopedic list comparing various words and phrases in three languages. Do we need WP:NOT#LANGUAGEREFERENCE? -- Finngall  talk  19:04, 12 May 2008 (UTC) Nintala (talk) 18:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)Keep, it is important to point out that Isan is a language similar to Lao by having a list of words. The section on Quebec French lexicon is no different. Also, this is the closest one will get to Lao vocabulary, as the Lao alphabet is not really supported by Unicode. As Ksero has said, it can be expanded. I have been building it up slowly.
 * Delete - Unencyclopedic is right! Ecoleetage (talk) 20:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - if Wikipedia is not a dictionary, it is certainly not a list of words from three different dictionaries that are different. Frank  |  talk  21:22, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this stub can probably be expanded to be something like Differences between Norwegian Bokmål and Standard Danish, Differences between standard Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian or other articles in Category:Language comparison — Ksero (talk | contribs) 22:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I think this point is exactly the reason the article should be deleted: Wikipedia is not a vocabulary list. If the similarity is worth pointing out, it can be done at any (or all) of the appropriate language pages. I would also say that these lists of other stuff are both a poor reason to keep this article, and good continuation list for investigation for further pruning. (Having said that, the Quebec French lexicon article is far more encyclopedic than this one.) Frank  |  talk  18:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, original research. Stifle (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.