Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-official languages of Singapore
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:37, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-official languages of Singapore (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:OR. Anything meaningful can be covered in Languages of Singapore. I'm suggesting deletion rather than redirection as this is an obscure title and there's only one inbound link. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Highly dubious that anyone will be searching for "Non-official languages of Singapore" as opposed to "Languages of Singapore", so a redirect isn't neccessary.--Hongkongresident (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or redirect I too doubt that anyone would search for the title, but you you never know. I can't see anything of value here that isn't in Languages of Singapore already. Peridon (talk) 12:12, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per above. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 14:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Object. As a representative of the authors of this page, we would like to say that this particular article is still in the process of being built and thus we request more time to provide more information on the topic. We believe that issues concerning Non-official languages of Singapore deserve more attention than is given under the Languages of Singapore page - for example, dialectal issues are small paragraphs in various articles concerning Singapore and her language policies. Also, we welcome suggestions for a more appropriate title change to the page. --Veldakhoo (talk) 03:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I may be missing something here, but why don't you just add the extra info to the existing article where people are far more likely to see it? My suspicious mind wonders if a point is being made by the creation of this article, and recommends looking at WP:POINT. I know if I wanted to know the languages of Singapore, I wouldn't type in 'non-official'. Peridon (talk) 10:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the advice, I have read WP:POINT and believe that what we plan to talk about, including the treatment and spread of such languages in Singapore have too little information on Wikipedia. While we are definitely putting the issue under the spotlight by writing an article on it, I sincerely believe we are not disrupting Wikipedia to prove something. In the upcoming couple of days we will be putting up some more content and perhaps you could judge from that? Also, we plan to arrange information on the Languages of Singapore page to better organise the content there now about Chinese, Malay and Indian dialects. These 'dialectal' issues would then be too huge to be added on to the existing page. However, we do agree that 'non-official' might not be a good enough link to the page that we're creating - yet for lack of a better word we're still using it at the current moment. --Veldakhoo (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This is the draft we are currently working on - we aim to get it to a standard that is acceptable to us before pushing it to the main page. As you can see, issues covered in this article are not covered elsewhere in Wikipedia's articles on Singaporean languages. We believe that this is adequate to push for a separate article on the topic. --Veldakhoo (talk) 19:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the advice, I have read WP:POINT and believe that what we plan to talk about, including the treatment and spread of such languages in Singapore have too little information on Wikipedia. While we are definitely putting the issue under the spotlight by writing an article on it, I sincerely believe we are not disrupting Wikipedia to prove something. In the upcoming couple of days we will be putting up some more content and perhaps you could judge from that? Also, we plan to arrange information on the Languages of Singapore page to better organise the content there now about Chinese, Malay and Indian dialects. These 'dialectal' issues would then be too huge to be added on to the existing page. However, we do agree that 'non-official' might not be a good enough link to the page that we're creating - yet for lack of a better word we're still using it at the current moment. --Veldakhoo (talk) 17:33, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I may be missing something here, but why don't you just add the extra info to the existing article where people are far more likely to see it? My suspicious mind wonders if a point is being made by the creation of this article, and recommends looking at WP:POINT. I know if I wanted to know the languages of Singapore, I wouldn't type in 'non-official'. Peridon (talk) 10:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.