Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eurish language


 * 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. - Philippe 02:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Eurish language

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

This article makes an unsubstantiated, unsourced assertion that is either a severe misunderstanding or vandalism. Eurish is one fellows *idea* of a language for a "New Holy Roman Empire" but I am not aware (nor is Google, for that matter) of any such historically attested language or dialect. Szfski (talk) 09:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete. Eurish is conceptually valid, and has several literary references - including James Blish's infamous "Spock's Brain". Occasionally attributed to James Joyce, as the style (not actual language) used in "Finnegan's Wake".  Check other resources: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,899462-1,00.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.3.177 (talk) 22:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The word eurish has been used before, as in the reference you gave, but that has nothing to do with the subject of this article, nor does James Joyce. This really calls the "conceptual validity" you attest into question, doesn't it? Merenta (talk) 22:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Database 	CSA Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts Title 	 	Europe's Linguistic Future: The Eurish-Problem Author 	 	Decsy, Gyula Affiliation 	EUROLINGUA, PO Box 101 Bloomington IN 47402-0101 Source 	 	Eurasian Studies Yearbook, 1993, 65, 7-18 ISSN 	 	0042-0786 Frank |  talk  17:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. JSTOR doesn't know about it.   Anturiaethwr  Talk  11:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Checked a variety of academic search engines, zero hits. Debate (talk) 12:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems a hoax.  AFAIK, the languages of administration in the HRE were chancery German, and earlier, Latin.  - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - also checked academic search engines. Came up with only a couple of hits with the following being the only one worth reading...except it has nothing to do with the article as written:
 * Delete as a non notable modern constructed language, see.--Berig (talk) 19:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete also see which appears to be what the Wikipedia article is referencing; I'm not sure if Berig's ref is the same as this or not. Regardless, notability just isn't there. Merenta (talk) 19:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've heard of the language, and I even recall having seen it in the past. But all relevant links seem to be dead, it seems the project is already on its way to oblivion. Anyway, the article is extremely short and little informative, so it won't be much of a loss anyway. (And indeed, even this single sentence seems to be wrong: it's a modern constructed language, BASED ON the old language of the HRE. But if so, how can it be a priori?) &mdash;IJzeren Jan Uszkiełtu?  07:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable modern constructed language which significantly post-dates the HRE, so the article is a hoax. Edward321 (talk) 18:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This article's creator also created articles for Shilhe language, Kota language, Chattisgarhi language,  Arikara language, and Khandeshi language which lead to questions on the reliability of those articles. Edward321 (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've had a quick look around, and between JSTOR and Google Books I've found mentions (I'm sure I could find good sources if I had the time) of all of those except Shilhe, which seems to be another name for Tashelhiyt; it looks like they're not hoaxes, at any rate.  Anturiaethwr  Talk  03:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per anon and the guy above me. --Pwnage8 (talk) 18:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * By "the guy above me," do you mean me? 'Cause I was just saying those others look legitimate; I still think this one should be deleted.   Anturiaethwr  Talk  02:06, 14 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.