Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of liquid phonemes in the English 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 of the debate was delete. Proto /// type  13:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

History of liquid phonemes in the English language
This article was created after someone merged the articles rhotic and nonrhotic accents and l-vocalization. Now those articles have been unmerged and this is a duplicate of them. Either they should be merged back here or this should be deleted. Voortle 16:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge articles back together. Articles contain useful information.  --Starionwolf 03:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Information is better split into the two separate articles rhotic and nonrhotic accents and l-vocalization, for reasons discussed on this article's talk page.  The l-vocalization article is not just about English, so merging that material under this title was inappropriate.--JHJ 11:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Merging the pages back makes no sense. The connection between L and R in English, or, more precisely, between L-vocalization and rhotic vs non-rhotic accents, is insignificant in practice and there is no reason to deal with both of them in the same article. It's like having both English and German history in an article on "History of West Germanic speaking nations". That said, a real history of the liquid phonemes, i.e. a diachronic overview of their development and significance mostly in Old English and Middle English, could make a meaningful article. The current one isn't about that all, it's mostly about synchronic differences that have been present during the last two or three centuries. --85.187.44.131 22:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete for redundancy and inappropriate combination of subjects, as explained above. '  (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 01:31, 19 June 2006 (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.