Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lapring 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 speedy deleted as a hoax by De728631 (non-admin closure)  Joseph2302 (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Lapring language

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't find any evidence for the existence of this language. I ran Google searches and  and came up empty-handed (other than a reference in the Wikipedia article Himshikhar Television, which I am now questioning). Finally, the image this article references, purporting to show text from a language in use 2,000 years ago, seems to be written in fluorescent marker and looks like a captcha with a mix of obstructed modern, Western digits and letters. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC) It exists in Jhapa district of Nepal. It has been just known by two historians, and it may not have been seen in google. The real inscription is taken by the researchers for more research in laboratory and the pictire posted here is a sample by made by the researchers. The page shouldnt be deleted. You may search #LapringLanguage on Twitter and Lapring Language Pratishthan Nepal on facbook, too. Prediction of existence of the language was mad! earlier by the locals and craeated the page in facebook, but it is proved officially by historians just few days ago! Thitojhapali (talk) 11:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I traced the mention in the Himshikhar Television article to the same editor and reverted his replacement of another item with it. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:09, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * OK but wikipedia pages can only be kept if they are supported by pre-existing reliable sources as per the WP:GNG and WP:RS. If anthropologists have studied this language, then where are the research studies? If they haven't published the studies yet, then it is WP:TOOSOON to have a WP page. As far as I can see, there aren't yet RS, so I'm going to !vote delete unless someone can show me something substantial. JMWt (talk) 11:15, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. No citations at all, let alone to reliable evidence that the language existed. Maproom (talk) 11:51, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - no evidence that this language exists. Possibly a hoax. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep I have also listened about the language in todays morning news. The researchers have published their records yesterday at 4:55 PM at Hotel Hayat, Kathmandu in a press conference! Loxboy33 (talk) 12:01, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That doesn't qualify the article under the notability guidelines. It has to be published in multiple reliable sources. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper where events are reported directly. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep You may look at Twitter #LapringLanguage and Lapring Language Pratisthan Nepal at facebook. It exist in Real, its our language. So, please don't delete it! Hunulase (talk) 12:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It obviously isn't your language, since it was only just now discovered. Having a page about something on Facebook or a Twitter feed about it isn't a qualification for a Wikipedia article. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Sanoasne (talk) 12:09, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Comment: I'd like to point out that the last three Keep votes are from accounts that were all created in the last 20 minutes, apparently for that purpose. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've opened Sockpuppet investigations/Thitojhapali. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Per their admission here that they're all the same person, I've struck them all out. The original account is allowed to post/vote here, not any of the others. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Most of the national media of Nepal has already published the news about its verification. It exist in real, it shouldnt be deleted. It will also be included in the list of languages in the next census of Nepal.Ibrahimrte (talk)
 * Still waiting for someone to show us all this evidence. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete unless there's evidence of it being covered in reliable sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:19, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep What do you think is reliable source? The national television of Nepal isnr realiable for you? It exist. Hestuwe (talk) 12:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you embed a copy of your television into the article as evidence? See WP:RS for an explanation of reliable sources on Wikipedia. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:26, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete No sources found. A clear hoax. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 12:31, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's the link to their facebook page and it seems like a hoax to me. I mean, one of the statements above claims it was in the news "yesterday" and yet the facebook page was created a year ago (march 2015)? And in addition, the user had created another Wikipedia page "Himali English Boarding School" which I nominated for speedy. This was the content (obtained from google cache) "The Shining Path Academy, Lakhanpur-4, Jhapa, Nepal is running a non-profit Boarding School named Himali English Boarding School, for the personality development of the children. It is located in child friendly and fresh environment and teaching moral and practical techniques rather than book rotting. The students are also motivated towards social service and well being of the nation. According to a teacher of the school Mr. Keshab Timsina, the students have helped for the victims of Sunkoshi Flood-2071 and Destructive Earthquake-2072 with 1 lakh each. The school is developing like an social organization rather than a boarding school. The important language of Lapring Civilization viz. Lapring Language is taught here for the knowlwdge of the children." The last line is a dead giveaway. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete No reliable sourcing. Certainly a probable hoax, if not clearly one. Also Note that the accounts of User:Ibrahimrte and User:Hestuwe have also only been created in the last twenty minutes. Adding to SPI. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 
 * Comment per, it is the same person for all the keep votes, so I've struck their comments. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - it seems at least possible to me that there has been a new discovery and that this is news in Nepal. But unless we have reliable sources, we can't have a wikipedia page for it. Maybe in the next days there will indeed be a large number of media sources which report on the story together with published academic studies on the topic.  It doesn't even have to be in English to be of use here. Until that happens, we have no way to determine that this is a real thing. Someone seeing a report about it on TV clearly isn't good enough. JMWt (talk) 13:05, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:22, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete. It is time to end this farce! The alleged "civilization" has nothing to corroborate it. The alleged society has no Google hits. The alleged director seems to have nothing but social networking. The alleged language had nothing in Google Books or News. In 17 alleged years of alleged research they published not one thing that turns up in Google Scholar about it? What were they researching? Publication avoidance strategies? The image suggests that the allegedly recently discovered language also has a written form, like people have been writing an unknown language for years without anybody finding out until now. Or maybe it is just some stuff written with a yellow marker pen (the preferred writing tool of language scholars?), and ineptly photographed in the dark, that may or may not be in any real language at all. This is all just WP:Complete Bollocks isn't it? Add the bad faith editing and there is no reason to give this any more benefit of the doubt. I'm going to tag it for speedy deletion now. If there anything real behind this then somebody else can write something coherent and referenced about it later. --DanielRigal (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Brilliant. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  13:58, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Uanfala (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete. This article is nothing but the ultimate fakeness of true bullshit. Fuck this article and fuck this bullshit. I agree with what DanielRigal says. It's fucking fake. The language does not exist. It was a made-up pile of original research, and the invention of a mad Nepalese George McVandal dude. Zakawer (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2016 (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.