Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lebanese Aramaic (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 20: Line 20:


:::No need to accuse me of anything. There was no third-party opinion last time, which is what I am seeking here. To me, there is no "significant coverage" on this topic, thus no need for a separate Lebanese Aramaic article. [[Western Aramaic languages|Western Aramaic]] was obviously spoken in Lebanon, and [[Syriac language|Syriac]] is a part of the Maronite church - but a separate article, heavly based on that Iskander article and some [[WP:OR]] (and plenty information solely on [[Syriac language|Syriac]])... I do not see how this is notable with one reference to "Lebanese Aramaic" in Bawardi's book and another one in a project description by Wardini. Let's hope his research will give us some more insight in time. This is not comparable with e.g. [[Christian Palestinian Aramaic|CPA]], which is actually discussed in Aramaic studies. [[User:Shmayo|Shmayo]] ([[User talk:Shmayo|talk]]) 12:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
:::No need to accuse me of anything. There was no third-party opinion last time, which is what I am seeking here. To me, there is no "significant coverage" on this topic, thus no need for a separate Lebanese Aramaic article. [[Western Aramaic languages|Western Aramaic]] was obviously spoken in Lebanon, and [[Syriac language|Syriac]] is a part of the Maronite church - but a separate article, heavly based on that Iskander article and some [[WP:OR]] (and plenty information solely on [[Syriac language|Syriac]])... I do not see how this is notable with one reference to "Lebanese Aramaic" in Bawardi's book and another one in a project description by Wardini. Let's hope his research will give us some more insight in time. This is not comparable with e.g. [[Christian Palestinian Aramaic|CPA]], which is actually discussed in Aramaic studies. [[User:Shmayo|Shmayo]] ([[User talk:Shmayo|talk]]) 12:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
::::There was the third-party opinion of user [[User:Maclearie|Maclearie]] so that is false. Again, this is a contradiction of “the topic has no sources except for the sources which explicitly mention it but let us just deem them irrelevant.” Not sure where the accusation of me adding original research comes from as I have cited all of the information I added but I would like to see a supposed example of such. [[User:Red Phoenician|Red Phoenician]] ([[User talk:Red Phoenician|talk]]) 03:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:30, 24 May 2024

Lebanese Aramaic

Lebanese Aramaic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Renominating this page for deletion, as there was no input from any third party last time (closed as "no consensus").

Motivation from last time still holds:

  • Keep: As already stated in the previous nomination an article about a language is notable. The article discusses both the vernacular Aramaic and classical Syriac as the two are tightly connected and furthermore the term Syriac was used at time to refer to Aramaic. Wikipedia does not care about what you do or do not believe from your own knowledge (WP:VERIFYOR) but relies on reliable sources which are already provided in the page. Even if Iskander’s source is contestable Bawardi and Wardini both use the term “Lebanese Aramaic” which you have conveniently left out. I already stated in the previous nomination you are free to edit the page, as everyone is, but you seem to have ignored this as you did my counters to your same points in the previous nomination which makes it seem like you are nominating this based on WP:WINNING rather than anything else. Regardless, I have amended the page to help distinct between the colloquial Aramaic and classical Syriac as that seems to be where part of the confusion is coming from. Red Phoenician (talk) 22:35, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No need to accuse me of anything. There was no third-party opinion last time, which is what I am seeking here. To me, there is no "significant coverage" on this topic, thus no need for a separate Lebanese Aramaic article. Western Aramaic was obviously spoken in Lebanon, and Syriac is a part of the Maronite church - but a separate article, heavly based on that Iskander article and some WP:OR (and plenty information solely on Syriac)... I do not see how this is notable with one reference to "Lebanese Aramaic" in Bawardi's book and another one in a project description by Wardini. Let's hope his research will give us some more insight in time. This is not comparable with e.g. CPA, which is actually discussed in Aramaic studies. Shmayo (talk) 12:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was the third-party opinion of user Maclearie so that is false. Again, this is a contradiction of “the topic has no sources except for the sources which explicitly mention it but let us just deem them irrelevant.” Not sure where the accusation of me adding original research comes from as I have cited all of the information I added but I would like to see a supposed example of such. Red Phoenician (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]