This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2007 August 10. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2008 September 8. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2010 December 28. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2011 January 13. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. There are strong arguments for deletion that don't seem to be addressed by those arguing to keep. No reliable sources have been presented to show verifiability. -- Core desat 07:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC) reply
This is a second nomination; the first nomination was closed as Keep, even though there were pretty strong arguments for deletion. The subject of the article is a constructed language, which fails notability guidelines ( WP:N). I can understand that the subject may seem worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia to enthusiasts of conlangs, such as Esperanto or Novial. However, Esperanto has its own culture with many thousands of speakers and activists; it also has its own literature and music scene. Novial, while not as popular as Esperanto, is the creation of a notable linguist, Otto Jespersen. Slovio, on the other hand, seems to be a project which is developed and used only on http://www.slovio.com and the related family of websites - http://www.slavsk.com/ , http://www.panslavia.com/ , http://www.zvestia.com/ and a few others, which all look very similar, as if they were designed by the same person. I found it mentioned on a few blogs, but i couldn't find that it is used by anyone for actual communication. I couldn't find any other significant primary sources for it (see also Talk:Slovio#Usage and validity of external links). Amir E. Aharoni 12:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC) reply
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2007 August 10. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2008 September 8. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2010 December 28. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2011 January 13. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
The result was delete. There are strong arguments for deletion that don't seem to be addressed by those arguing to keep. No reliable sources have been presented to show verifiability. -- Core desat 07:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC) reply
This is a second nomination; the first nomination was closed as Keep, even though there were pretty strong arguments for deletion. The subject of the article is a constructed language, which fails notability guidelines ( WP:N). I can understand that the subject may seem worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia to enthusiasts of conlangs, such as Esperanto or Novial. However, Esperanto has its own culture with many thousands of speakers and activists; it also has its own literature and music scene. Novial, while not as popular as Esperanto, is the creation of a notable linguist, Otto Jespersen. Slovio, on the other hand, seems to be a project which is developed and used only on http://www.slovio.com and the related family of websites - http://www.slavsk.com/ , http://www.panslavia.com/ , http://www.zvestia.com/ and a few others, which all look very similar, as if they were designed by the same person. I found it mentioned on a few blogs, but i couldn't find that it is used by anyone for actual communication. I couldn't find any other significant primary sources for it (see also Talk:Slovio#Usage and validity of external links). Amir E. Aharoni 12:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC) reply