Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swati Wikipedia


 * 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 Merge to List of Wikipedias. WaltonOne 14:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Swati Wikipedia

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

There is nothing in this article to indicate the notability of this web destination. It would be a candidate for speedy deletion, but for the controversiality of deleting Wikipedias. This google search doesn't turn up any sources, and this google news search turns up nothing at all. Without non-trivial mention in reliable, third-party published sources this article is unverifiable as well. For a similar Afd, see Articles for deletion/Quechua Wikipedia. Deranged bulbasaur 05:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. With less than 50 articles, the Swati Wikipedia is not ready to warrant an article of its own here on the English Wikipedia, particularly with no independent sources cited for this article. --Metropolitan90 07:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. It's too small to be recognized independently. Shalom Hello 13:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Wikipedias (which doesn't mention it currently). Non-notable for own article. PrimeHunter 01:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Wikipedias. -- Ned Scott 02:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge as per Primehunter. Capitalistroadster 02:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Uh... has a long way to reach the list on our Main Page. For Wikipedias, size = critical mass = people are obviously interested = media will follow = notability. Not so for Wikipedias that have less than 100 articles; I don't know what interesting can we say about this site than what's already in other articles. Welcome back when it does get notable. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 13:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of Wikipedias for now, recreate if it becomes notable (per news search) Giggy  UCP 03:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. As I mentioned for Quechua Wikipedia: Stub articles on minor Wikipedias seem like a fine and appropriate idea to me. As a Wikipedia, I think is is notable on Wikipedia, and I hope they all get expanded.  I would also favor expanding the table on List of Wikipedias to include a few more more statistics, especially number of articles.--Absurdist 07:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to List of Wikipedias, or alternatively create a new article on African language Wikipedias and move all the content of these (and similar) articles there, with appropraite redirects. Google news archive shows quite a few reliable sources (including The New York Times) to indicate that at such a topic would be notable and encyclopedic. DHowell 04:21, 18 July 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.