Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yi language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 close. For starters, this redirect should have been sent to Project:Redirects for discussion, not AFD, for deletion. On top of that, even Britannica's "Tibeto-Burman languages" article acknowledges that "the North Loloish subgroup" is called Yi by some people. Where this redirect should point, and how the language family should be discussed overall, is not a matter for AFD. Uncle G (talk) 19:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Yi language (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Yi != Nuosu ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 11:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- No, if the main content is now at Nuosu, the Yi Languages should redirect there because most, including myself, would have gone looking for Yi, not Nuosu. Akerbeltz (talk) 12:53, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- 虞海, what's your reason for saying Yi ≠ Nuosu, anyway? --JorisvS (talk) 13:27, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Well it does say so on the Nuosu page. Akerbeltz (talk) 14:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah sorry I misread the funny !=. Both Nuosu and Nuosu language say that Nuosu is the endonym for Yi now used. So we redirect. Akerbeltz (talk) 14:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect Thryduulf (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It used to be a redirect. 虞海 changed that (kind of), only to propose it here one minute later. --JorisvS (talk) 18:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I restored the redirect, let's not waste any more time on such a spurious AfD nomination. Akerbeltz (talk) 19:17, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- It used to be a redirect. 虞海 changed that (kind of), only to propose it here one minute later. --JorisvS (talk) 18:42, 11 January 2011 (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.