Talk:Worldbet

This page was proposed for deletion by Angr (talk · contribs) on 23 September 2012 with the comment:
Fails WP:GNG - no indication of use by anyone other than its creator, no independent coverage.
It was contested by Moyogo (talk · contribs) on 2012-09-24 with the comment:
clearly used by others than author

Sources, notability

This article currently cites descriptions of the orthography and discussions of them by the World Wide Web Consortium. These appear to be primary sources, written or co-written by the creator of WorldBet. This edit seems to assert that discussion of a possible W3C standard indicates notability. That doesn't seem right to me, but I may well be ignorant of the relevant standards. I am therefore asking members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet and Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics for comment. Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 08:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The W3C coverage seems to not consider setting this as a standard as much as simply supporting this in another context (and it was ultimately not included in the standard anyway). I agree that that seems awfully iffy grounds for inclusion. Any comments from WP:INET?

Beyond the four main systems we have had listed for long (SAMPA, X-SAMPA, TIPA, Kirshenbaum) I have seen a wide variety of other homebrewn ASCII-IPAs referenced or in use (Carrasquer, Branner, Kolagian, Z-SAMPA…) but this is the first time I run into this system. It does not strike me as very notable among its kin at all. (Also poorer in coverage than even regular X-SAMPA anyway — the "SAMPA extended" mentioned in the specs is presumably a different, older system.) --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 15:15, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should probably expand the "ASCII and keyboard transliterations" section in the International Phonetic Alphabet's article to mention Worldbet and a few others like ARPAbet, TIMITbet and UCLAbet (they all seem to have been used in speech corpora) and redirect this page there. — Lfdder (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]