Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of insular languages


 * 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. -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  07:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

List of insular languages
Contested PROD. Orphaned list article covering languages that happen to be spoken on islands. This would make sense if there was some implied (non-OR) claim that languages on islands are somehow special (like that they develop differently from languages elsewhere, etc.) No such claim is made here, and to the best of my knowledge not in the linguistic literature either. Therefore, the subject of this list is not a coherent encyclopedic topic, it's listcruft. We could just as well have "languages spoken on mountains", "languages spoken in plains", "languages spoken in swamps", "languages spoken in deserts", "languages spoken near rivers"... Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless referenced. I find that "insular" is used frequently in ethnography e.g. about Polynesia, not so much about larger places like Indonesia. For languages, "insular language" most often is just a colloquialism. "Insular" occurs most often in terms of Celtic language to distinguish the varieties on the Isles from the varieties on the Continent. But Google doesn't show that they're classified this way in any formal sense. --Dhartung | Talk 11:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless an expert confirms this is valid and used classification. At first I though it is about language isolate. Indonesian doesn't feel as a proper example. Pavel Vozenilek 12:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete absent credible sourcing. There are in any case few enough that they could be included in the parent article if only I could find it... Guy 13:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, the inclusion of languages spoken at location X seems over the top, unless as others proposed there is proof presented that states these languages develop uniquely from all others. --NuclearUmpf 13:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, tagged as such. This is a total waste of time to discuss this article.  It's clearly a speedy delete candidate under A3.  This is following process for process's sake, and it's ridiculous.  WP:IAR certainly applies here, as much as I hate that essay. Billy Blythe 14:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Nacon kantari  14:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Duja 14:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete no mention of English! Also no definition of precisely what percentage of speakers (on Island:off Island) is needed to become "Insular" :) - Francis Tyers · 15:18, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, but this is not speediable. It also seems like a pretty interesting subject if, per above, references can be found for it.  Let it run its course, and if no source appears, delete the article.  JDoorj a m     Talk 17:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete For a second I also thought this was meant as a list of language isolates, but the article on that phenomenon contains a list.--T. Anthony 20:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree this was probably meant as a list of language isolates. This shouldn't exist as a list anyway; if anything, it should be a category. Delete. Alba 20:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well there already is a Category:Language isolates. However lists do serve purposes categories don't. If you check the list at the article language isolate you'll see that it contains languages that do not yet have articles. A category couldn't do that. That said the list in the article is sufficient.--T. Anthony 21:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I don't think language isolates is what the author of this page was after. He really meant the geographical definition. The only remote chance for that criterion to make sense would be if it was restricted to languages that are the only language on the island where they are spoken, and thus in geographical isolation from language contact. That might conceivably influence their development (a claim that has been made with respect to Icelandic). Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks like OR, right down to the term. | Mr. Darcy talk 00:18, 1 October 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.