Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erina language

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 speedy delete as a blatant hoax (WP:CSD#G3). Max Semenik (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Erina language (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Erina var (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The language didn't exist - I didn't find anything in search about it, as well as links in article are all dead Arthistorian1977 (talk) 08:58, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk  09:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:53, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep- this is old languageKratie222 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:57, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete In addition to the reasons given in the nomination, my suspicion that this is a hoax is reinforced by the determined way that the two creators delete talk page posts of other editors and remove CSD and AFD tags with misleading edit summaries. —teb728 t c 10:14, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The article links to non-existent ISO and glottolog codes. Most of the plausibly-looking content of the article (together with the now broken refs to works by Degener and Rajapurohit, which don't mention Erina at all) appears to have been lifted from Shina language. Add to it the wacky claims about the language's antiquity or membership of the Slavonic group and it's clear that the article as it stands now is a hoax. However, glottolog does list the similarly looking Arniya as an alternative name of the Khowar language; this might indicate it's a regional variant, so I'd imagine there might exist sources about that, for whoever wants to start a proper article about it in the future. Uanfala (talk) 10:32, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: There is an another article with different name (Erina var) also exists. GSS (talk) 10:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a redirect to this one. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 10:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment it's a duplicate. I've nominated it for deletion. Uanfala (talk) 10:42, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala: Please check this redirect page as well Erina var language. Thank You – GSS (talk) 10:59, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - this is language in pakistan Daud khan 2 (talk) 11:06, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're allowed only one vote. Uanfala (talk) 11:24, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - strongly keep this language has no connection with language like arniya or khowar it is different so this article must not be deleteDaud khan 2 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:12, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it's a different language, we need sources stating that. It doesn't even need for the sources to say it's a separate language, as long as they provide enough detail about it and they make it clear that it is a distinct regional or social variety. Uanfala (talk) 11:24, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There is an article, Shina, which is also a language in Baltistan which sound similar. However, the Library of Congress didn't list the language code, at [[1]], nor did the language code turn up at the much more extensive github raw list, which encompasses even dead languages, here: [[2]]. Non of the language codes show up. Google books has no mention of the language, for languages spoken in Baltistan, although it's list of books it's copied and stolen is minute. scope_creep 12:44, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd caution against using, in future discussions like this, either the ISO 639-2 codes (from the LoC link) or the ISO 639-3 ones (from your github link) as they don't aim at being extensive (not all varieties are covered) and they are maintained by Ethnologue, which has been notoriously slow in catching up with current research. The only database that I know of that aims to be extensive is Glottolog and it's already linked from the language infoboxes. But other than that, I'd agree: the ISO codes provided in this article are clearly made up. Uanfala (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: as nominated: as hoax. Fylbecatulous talk 15:47, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. All the linked sources appear to be either broken or irrelevant. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Please redirect to Burushaski — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.38.67.78 (talk) 06:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unsourced/hoax. This has significant similarities to the Arina language article that was salted last year after being repeatedly recreated by socks. I'll raise an SPI against the involved editors. --McGeddon (talk) 15:06, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Hoax. The consonant and vowel tables and the diphthong lists were clearly lifted from Shina. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Erina Language doesn't exist and most of the content was pulled from the Shina Language article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.38.67.78 (talk) 16:47, 11 April 2016 (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.