Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mid-Pacific English

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. Cirt (talk) 04:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mid-Pacific English

Unsourced article. I can't find any trace of this concept - apparently the author self-invented it as a paralell to "mid-atalntic english". the only trace of anything connected to "Mid-pacific English" I can find is on Pacific Ocean Creol/Pidgin based languages, however this still doesn't seem to be a widely accepted term. Passportguy (talk) 11:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with Passportguy. The Mid-Pacific accent is distinct. ajhshamley —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajhshamley (talk • contribs) 11:36, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any reliable sources for the existance of this ? Passportguy (talk) 11:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case anyone goes through the history of this, I closed it, believing it withdrawn by nominator. Actually I now realise Passportguy intended to withdraw the nomination of the AfD below (it was a little confusing). Passportguy's reversion of my closure was correct, and he did it at my invitation. No abuse has taken place, just a misunderstanding.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 12:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like original research. Delete unless evidence is presented that this is a concept recognized by academic linguists. Ladyof Shalott 18:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can find only one mention of the term, in a 1986 article by Gunther Kress suggesting that there is no international media standard English. Google turns up an alt.english.usage thread from 2007 under that title, but that's hardly a reliable source. It appears to lack notability and the potential for reliable sources. Cnilep (talk) 20:44, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 10:24, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obvious example of WP:OR. Orderinchaos 03:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Appears to be OR Nick-D (talk) 05:38, 12 June 2009 (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.