Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UNI (artificial 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. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:47, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

UNI (artificial language)

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

Obviously non-notable project, as stated in the article itself —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 15:23, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:43, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – A quick search found no mention anywhere. In the article, aside from the two primary sources, the only source is the Harrison profile, which says that it was intended to be a practical language but had dropped out of sight by 1993. – Margin1522 (talk) 18:32, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Misguided creation, altlangs are not automatically notable Shii (tock) 13:57, 5 January 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.