Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/N'Ko 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 Close - AfD is not required for either Evertype's proposed solution or Tobias Conradi's current split. AfD is not for resolving content disputes, and if an admin advised you to bring it here then they misinformed you. If a solution can not be worked out take the matter to WP:RFC. Yomangani talk 01:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

N'Ko alphabet
A short article named N'Ko was needlessly split into N'Ko script and N'Ko language. I disputed this, and attempted to revert to a single article. An edit war ensued, unfortunately, resulting also in the moving of N'Ko script to N'Ko alphabet by the splitter. I proposed on the Talk:N'Ko page that the article should only be split if there were consensus from other editors that it be split. The splitter has ignored this, and it's been getting unpleasant. There is no reason that the single N'Ko article can't deal effectively with both script and language issues (at least until it gets much longer than it is) and therefore 'I request that N'Ko alphabet'' be deleted (or made into a redirect) and what unique content it contains be merged into N'Ko -- Evertype·✆ 18:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge as nominator. -- Evertype·✆ 19:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge as per nomination. Both articles cover simiar ground and material. A duplication of detail. scope_creep 18:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * They only cover similiar stuff because the alphabet stuff was already merged into N'Ko. In WP we have articles for languages and articles for writing systems. This one is a writing system article belonging to WikiProject Writing systems -- Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment should be sorted out by WikiProject Writing systems. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment this could be resolved by the user who split the articles to produce a better article in line with the style set out by WikiProject Languages. - Francis Tyers · 18:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * the user who split the article cannot work on the language article, since that is protected. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Work on it in a subpage, or a subpage of your userpage. - Francis Tyers · 20:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No need to work on a 'subpage' and certainly not in my userspace. I like the colaborative nature of wikipedia. If you want to work privatly, maybe you are in the wrong project? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I am quite prepared to do the work of merging and would like to help to improve the article. I have worked extensively with N'Ko, as is well-known. -- Evertype·✆ 19:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. N'Ko alphabet is used for several languages, not only N'Ko language Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Tobias Conradi is the splitter mentioned in the nomination. The N'Ko script can be used to transcribe other languages. I have a document in French and N'Ko in N'Ko script. This does not mean that French (or any other language) is conventionally written in N'Ko script. The N'Ko language is a literary language which is only written in N'Ko. There is -- honestly -- no need to have the language described on a page of its own. We only need one article, N'Ko. -- Evertype·✆ 19:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Can you cite soures for the claim that "The N'Ko language is a literary language which is only written in N'Ko.". Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, of course I can. When the articles are merged, I will work on improving the article. By the way what you inserted in the info box about Manding languages is not quite correct. -- Evertype·✆ 19:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - compare Category:Manding languages to see that language articles are named "X language" - except N'Ko. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment It is clear to me that you do not understand the nature of the literary language which is N'Ko. Clearly you simply want to "win" here. I do not. I want an encyclopaedia that works. We need only one article, N'Ko. We had that until YOU decided to change this unilaterally without discussion. You were wrong, and have given no reasonable justification for your action. N'Ko alphabet needs to be merged with N'Ko so we can improve the article. -- Evertype·✆ 23:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You are very often talking in plural. Who is we? And maybe stop your false claims. Instead work on the articles and add content. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, the AfD process is not meant to deal with content disputes over splitting up or merging articles. Please take this to RfC or anything usefull. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 00:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment If Mr Conradi were a reasonable editor, that might be possible. It is not. There was one article, N'Ko, which he has split. In point of fact, he is now continuing to edit N'Ko alphabet and N'Ko language while we have this dispute. This seems to me to be bad faith. All that is happening is a whole lot of confusion is being added to the Wikipedia. I was advised by one Administrator to propse a VfD to merge the articles all back into N'Ko. Please be specific about how we can resolve this. All I see is Mr Conradi acting as though he can do whatever he likes. -- Evertype·✆ 15:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * False claims again and again. Evertype can't you stop it? Can't you add content to the language article like I do add content? I am editing the language article because the N'Ko articles is protected. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:05, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You split the article. I dispute that the article should be split. I have now also given the following at Talk:N'Ko: It is not acceptable to me to have the two articles split. Mr Conradi endeavours to force a taxonomy for all language and script articles on the Wikipedia. But he does NOT know anything about N'Ko. The literary dialect which now has the ISO 639 script code "nqo" is only ever written in N'Ko script. Indeed, because of the nature of the N'Ko script and the way it informs the literary dialect, it is impossible to see how the literary dialect could be written in the Latin or Arabic scripts, because it is intimately tied to the writing conventions of the N'Ko script. I have tried to explain this elsewhere, but instead of discussing with other editors and agreeing in consensus, Mr Conradi has ploughed on ahead, splitting and adding more material to the split articles, oblivious to the fact that he is doing is counter to the facts of the sociolinguistic situation for N'Ko. It makes no sense at all to have N'Ko alphabet separate from N'Ko language, and that split in fact makes it more difficult to write an article which correctly and usefully addresses the facts. A single article, N'Ko, is all that is needed here. I (who have worked with the N'Ko user community for several years) cannot edit Mr Conradi's split articles. I cannot improve them. They make no sense while split. The split is only wanted by Mr Conradi. Not by anyone else. He split the articles without consultation or consensus. There is sustained opposition to the split; he has not convinced me with his "justification" that "all language and script articles should be split". It makes sense for many of them to be split. It makes no sense for N'Ko to be split. N'Ko is a special case. We (the Wikipedia community interested in Writing Systems) should not want Mr Conradi to "get the numbers to 100%". He wishes to do this for its own sake, not because it makes sense to treat N'Ko this way. I ask you, Mr Conradi, can you possibly agree that in this case your desire for tidiness is incorrect and unhelpful, and that you should listen to someone with expertise in the script in question, and agree to allow us to revert to a single article N'Ko which can then be improved and expanded usefully? I ask this courteously, despite the fact that your willfulness and your apparent pleasure in doing whatever you please with the Wikipedia is extremely exasperating. Ikiroid, that is the best I can do. -- Evertype·✆ 09:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I would like to merge new content at N'Ko language and N'Ko alphabet to the article N'Ko, to redirect those to N'Ko, and to have N'Ko (disambiguation) deleted. If this is agreeable, we can close this AfD. -- Evertype·✆ 11:00, 14 November 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.