Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Voynich Alphabet


 * 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   no consensus. None of the sides presents a convincing argument. The "merge" votes are literally votes. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

European Voynich Alphabet

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No assertion of notability, seems to be specific to a small group of specialists, with no third-party coverage whatsoever. ☻☻☻Sithman VIII !!☻☻☻ 21:18, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - The subject, Voynich characters, is notable. The main article Voynich manuscript is too large to merge. This article should also cover other encodings, if they exist. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, Voynich manuscript at 55KB is ripe to be split. Keep indeed. Raymie Humbert (t • c) 06:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, the subject is not the Voynich characters, but a specific method of encoding the Voynich characters with the Latin Alphabet. I agree that the main article needs to be split, but I see no reason for this to be its destination. ☻☻☻Sithman  VIII !!☻☻☻ 17:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Voynich manuscript. Edward321 (talk) 18:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to Voynich manuscript. Deor (talk) 20:08, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - of interest to students of linguistics and history. Merger is a bad idea for such a long parent article. Bearian (talk) 20:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Being of interest to certain people is no argument at all. As for the merge problem, the parent article is probably going to be split soon anyway, at which point this could remain in the parent article. ☻☻☻Sithman  VIII !!☻☻☻ 22:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: per Petri - Ret.Prof (talk) 03:01, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you even read the rest of the discussion? The article isn't about the Voynich Characters (which is indeed a notable subject), but a specific method of transcribing said characters.  This method of transcription (read:the subject of the article) is non-notable, having no significant third-party coverage.  If this article was to cover other transcription methods, as Petri suggested, (I know of no such other methods), it would have to be under another name, with essentially the entire article as it now stands removed, as non-notable.  As such, there is no good reason to keep, merge, or move this article.  A redirect may be in order, though I can't imagine what it would redirect to. ☻☻☻Sithman  VIII !!☻☻☻ 20:41, 10 August 2010 (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.