Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Makmelida


 * 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 -- JForget 00:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

M%C3%A4km%C3%A9l%C3%AD%C3%A2/Makmelida
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod. Looks like something that was made up one day. May be eligible for speedy deletion since The author acknowledges that "There are no Sources that even mention Mäkmélíâ as a language." -- Shunpiker (talk) 10:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Pure nonsense to me. Something is screwy with the AFD box text though on this page. Mbisanz (talk) 10:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It's a personal conlang, probably made up by the author to test various constructs. I think the screwy text has to do with the accented characters... Yng  varr  10:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I think the screwiness is due to the embedded slash in the title of the page. It plays havoc with templates. I had to rename this AfD page (without the slash) in order for it to properly embed within the December 28 AfD page. -- Shunpiker (talk) 14:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. To quote the page, "Note: This is the first documented page on this language" - fails NOR, completely original research - though that isn't a criteria for WP:SPEEDY. -- alex.muller (talk) 11:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, if not a hoax, then certainly a very obscure and non-notable conlang. Lankiveil (talk) 12:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Snowball this nonsense  Thin boy  00  @998, i.e. 22:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Do Not Delete why is it so hard to believe that "this conlang" is real? We speak it as if this was our mother tongue... Me a bunch of other people just wanted to spread the language... Although, I do admit to violating the NOR policy so I will delete the article myself... I will look for some other place to put my work. Cheesemeister01 (talk) 18:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I believe that original research on constructed languages is welcome at the conlang wiki. (Also: KneeQuickie, and the FrathWiki.) -- Shunpiker (talk) 21:36, 29 December 2007 (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.