Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montenegrin 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   keep. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:44, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Montenegrin alphabet

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Hoax. Article about alphabet of nonexistent language. (Without ISO 639-1 standard.)  Alex discussion ★ 15:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment ISO 639-1 is a very basic standard that covers only 136 of the world's most widely spoken languages. There are many more languages than that.  Montenegrin is sometimes coded "sr-ME".  On Wictionary, it is coded "zls-mon".  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  00:17, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Not a hoax but rather a nationalistic dispute about whether Montenegrin is a dialect or a language. Discussed in reliable sources.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  18:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Montenegro-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:49, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep The topic is notable because it has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources such as the BBC, even though opponents of Montenegrin nationalism oppose this alphabet strongly. I have added a 1916 source to the article as well.   Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  22:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Notable. SL93 (talk) 23:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per added reliable sources and availability of them that establish notability of the topic Northamerica1000 (talk) 00:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not a hoax. And additionally, articles shouldn't be deleted just because some people may disagree with the politics behind the subject. Linguogeek (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. There may be something I'm missing, but I don't get this nomination at all. It's not even about a language, it's about the alphabet, which apparently exists, and such things cannot be not-notable. Drmies (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2011 (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.