Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Otjiherero grammar

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 keep‎. Consensus is against applying WP:TNT. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 04:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Otjiherero grammar

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is mostly a grammar manual, and has been tagged for reference manual concerns for more than six years without improvement. It looks like a manual mainly because it extensively referenced from a self-published book called Otjiherero: Grammar Manual by User:Tom.m.rose, one of the co-authors of the book. The subject is certainly notable, but I'm nominating it here for deletion to start over because of the conflict of interest, self-published source, and self-promotion issues. Mikeblas (talk) 16:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Africa. Shellwood (talk) 16:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe there are any conflict of interest or self-promotion issues with this article. I do not host, distribute, or profit in any way from this "book", so I don't see the "conflict of interest". I also have no social presence to "self-promote" related to this topic. A simple Google search could confirm all of this.

On the other hand, there is great information on this page. The co-author and I would have benefitted immensely from access to this knowledge 15 years ago when we were living amongst the Herero people. Do we really think someone is going to put all of this information back onto Wikipedia? I wouldn't be qualified to at this point, as I haven't spoken Otjiherero in 13 years.

Moreover, this is Wikipedia: if it's wrong, someone can just come correct it.

Is it a perfect situation? No. But I hope this knowledge doesn't get lost, especially without a good reason. Tom.m.rose (talk) 00:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know enough about its policies, but if you want to ensure that this information/knowledge doesn't get lost perhaps Wikibooks would be a suitable location for it, regardless of what happens to Otjiherero grammar on Wikipedia? Shazback (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't think this is a good application of WP:BLOWITUP. Even if the self-published source doesn't measure up to our requirements, taking out all content referenced by it would still leave a somewhat useful start-class article. Moreover, there isn't much literature on the subject, and the little there is (the work of Kavari and the Embo Romambo), is already part of the references. Generally, an author of a monograph on the subject editing Wikipedia is a good thing, not a bad thing. As the article is not about Tom Rose or their book but about the topic of their book, there is no COI. --Pgallert (talk) 10:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 02:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as per Pgallert. Taking everything into account the balance of benefit seems clearly in favour of keeping the article. Ingratis (talk) 14:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per the above points. One further comment though: perhaps rename the article Herero grammar, if Herero is indeed the WP:COMMONNAME of the language (as evinced by the title of the Herero language article itself), with a redirect as appropriate of course. Brusquedandelion (talk) 00:23, 12 February 2024 (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.