Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Entish


 * 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 to Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Entish

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Entish is a non-notable fictional language. Furthermore, this article treats the language's fictional history as if it was real. I think it is time to dispose of this piece of rubbish. &#8213; Susmuffin Talk 18:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. &#8213; Susmuffin  Talk 18:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions. &#8213; Susmuffin  Talk 18:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. &#8213; Susmuffin  Talk 18:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. &#8213; Susmuffin  Talk 18:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete/Redirect to Ent. Completely unsourced, completely in-universe plot information.  Searching for sources turns up nothing of substance about the fictional language that requires a WP:SPLIT from the main article on the fictional species.  Most sources, in fact, are referring to a programming language that, while possibly named for the fictional language, does not actually confer any notability to it.  Rorshacma (talk) 18:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 19:03, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Ent. The entire "New Entish" section reeks of possible OR, and there's not much of anything related to this language.  Tolkien fleshed out a lot of his fictional languages, but this one never got much detail. Hog Farm (talk) 19:37, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete do not redirect. The langauge is not elaborated on in reliable sources. It is not a needful search term, and having it as a redirect will just encourage more cluttering of articles with unneeded links.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep in some form. This is Tolkien, his works have spawned a corpus of commentaries and analyses that's several orders of magnitude bigger than the sum total of everything he wrote. So even if there are only scrattered mentions of the language in Tolkien's own works, there's enough in the secondary literature for an encyclopedia entry. For example, there's a page about it in Jim Allan's 1978 An Introduction to Elvish (pp. 176–177), scattered paragraphs here and there (these are the first two that came up on google books:, ). Given the unusual nature of the language – it has no nouns to speak of, with each "name" used telling the whole story of the thing it refers to – it's not surprising that it will have inspired a programming language, and so in the literature on that there are occasional paragraphs (like here) about the original Entish. Whether there's enough coverage for a standalone article, I wouldn't care to decide, but a section in Ent will not be out of place. If the article is kept, then it goes without saying it will need to be seriously trimmed down. – Uanfala (talk) 01:26, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien.--Jack Upland (talk) 03:51, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Ent. I would hesitate to call it a "language constructed by Tolkien" because I know of no evidence that he constructed more than a couple of phrases ad hoc. For the languages that seriously interested him, he wrote grammars. —Tamfang (talk) 22:49, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge. Is there some kind of anti-Tolkien campaign happening? This is the second such article I've encountered recently. Clearly there is quality content here that shouldn't be deleted haphazardly. Perhaps a merge to Ent would be adequate as suggested above. As for keeping the article itself, I generally agree with Uanfala above, albeit adding that perhaps there isn't enough independent content to support a stand-alone article. The machine is taking over, sadly. Best, PK650 (talk) 22:30, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * To answer the question in your first sentence, I've seen a large number of PRODs and RfDs to do with Tolkien the last month or so. – Uanfala (talk) 00:19, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If you will, it is more like an anti-fiction campaign that covers more than just Tolkien. Some editors seem to agree that "Wikipedia has an amazingly out of control coverage of fictional places, people and events." De728631 (talk) 05:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The article on Barahir had had 0 sources, and yet had existed 16 years. Many other articles have been tagged for violation of policy for 8 years or more. It is high time this randon Tolkiencruft was brought under control. We created notability guidelines in 2006, but Tolkien articles have not yet been brought under them.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Ent. This isn't much of language as compared to Tolkien's Elvish, so a standalone article is not merited. De728631 (talk) 05:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien. KartikeyaS343 (talk) 19:01, 23 January 2020 (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.