Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadruvian 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 delete. The article's subject is found to not be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 10:19, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nadruvian language

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

The is not a shred of information about the language spoken by the ages extict Old Prussian tribe of Nadruvians, nor whether they have a separate tongue at all, nor who they were. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 19:24, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No mention in academia, which is why the article is unsourced, I suppose. Brandmeister^talk 21:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I was able to find 2 sources for the written material ( it is in Lithuania and it is endangered ) But I still vote delete, we have an article Nadruvians that can easily hold the information about their language, if down the road we have so much information about their language we need to spin out an article we can then, but having 2 stubs isn't the best way to get the content developed. Bryce Carmony (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And I was able to conclude that these refs are unreliable and do not support what you added to the article, see uts talk page for detail. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is that the only information about it is that it was Spoken by Nadruvians. But we know nothing about them. For all we know, they might have been speaking Obregonian. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lithuania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2015 (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.