Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 November 13: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:01, 19 November 2006

< November 12	November 14 >

Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 November)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 Please notify the administrator who performed the action that you wish to be reviewed by leaving {{subst:DRVNote|page name}} on their talk page.
 -->
-====[[Beautiful languages]]====
-This page was [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beautiful languages|nominated for deletion]] by [[User:Crzrussian|Crzrussian]], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Beautiful+languages speedily deleted] on the same day by [[User:Chairboy|Chairboy]].
-I am not sure that the article ever qualified as a speedy candidate.  The grounds suggested in the nomination, that it was "inherently POV", are not grounds for speedy deletion last time I checked.
-I am also not convinced that the subject is entirely valueless - Jacques Barzun opined that the most beautiful English word was ''cellardoor'' - or that the last contents were so worthless as to be unusable.  It mentioned a poll taken that claimed that Norwegian was the most beautiful European language, which suggests a sourceable statement.  Some notice could also be taken of the cultivation of some languages, notably Italian, for music outside of the areas where they are spoken as native tongues. - [[User:Ihcoyc|Smerdis of Tlön]] 19:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Keep deleted''' per [[WP:SNOW]]. Bad-process deletion, but in its current form, totally useless and no chance of surviving an AfD. Let whoever really wants to have an article there just write a better one. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 20:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Comment''' - I'm not certain what part of the process was "bad" per [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|{{{2|Future Perfect at Sunrise}}}]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|talk]]{{•}}&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Future Perfect at Sunrise|contribs]])'s comment above (please elaborate), I speedied it under [[WP:CSD]] A1 with an uncited modifier, which is reflected by the deletion log.  Ihoyc's comment that I speedied it because it was inherently POV is simply not true, but I happen to agree that there's absolutely no way to make an article on 'beautiful sounding languages' recoverable.  That wasn't the criteria I applied, though.  - [[User:Chairboy|C<small>HAIRBOY]]</small> ([[User_talk:Chairboy|☎]]) 20:58, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
-**Sorry about that - wasn't sure I understood the very brief comment left when you deleted it.  (The letters CSD might have helped :-).  At any rate, the last version of the article had three paragraphs, and was reasonably clear what it was trying to be about, ao I'm not sure that it qualifies under [[WP:CSD]] A1 either.  I will have to sit down with Mario Pei's ''One Language For the World'' one of these evenings; Pei did a great deal of editorialising about the aesthetics of both natural and artificial languages as they existed in the late 1950s. - [[User:Ihcoyc|Smerdis of Tlön]] 21:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
-* '''Endorse deletion''' unless we have a valid objective definition of beautiful.  Which of course we don't because it's inherently subjective. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> 23:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
-*I'm on the fence with this: "Inherently POV" in this instance means "essay" or "original research."  Essays that are direct confessions of an author's point of view can be awfully like tests.  However, it was an improper deletion.  That said, the article pretty much has to fail the deletion policy, and I'd rather see the linguistics interest expressed in a more mediated, cited, and cooperative, and far less idiosyncratic form and don't know that going to AfD will accomplish that.  [[User:Geogre|Geogre]] 02:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''' An article on this subject is probably impossible and should certainly be at a less POV title like ''Phonoasthetics of language'' or something.  [[User:Eluchil404|Eluchil404]] 15:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Comment''': Not having seen what was deleted, can whatever was trying to reference this article be sent to the rather impressive [[cellar door]] article instead? -- ''[[User:Nae'blis|nae]]'[[User_talk:Nae'blis|blis]]'' 22:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''' it's not a speedy, but it's certainly not a valid article. [[User:Danny Lilithborne|Danny Lilithborne]] 07:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)