Appendix talk:Chinook Jargon
Deletion debate
[edit]
The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Transwiki to Wikisource. Does not really belong in the Project namespace. -- Prince Kassad 16:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- We've kept stuff like this before in appendices, but this is just an awful page. The title is incomprehensible, isn't Chinook a language? If so what is Chinook Jargon (capitalized too). If we were to rename, the cleanup would be pretty massive. Isn't stuff like this for Wikibooks, not Wikisource. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Chinook Jargon is a pidgin language based on multiple Native American languages.
This is an exact transcript of a (public domain) dictionary, and as such I see it qualifying for Wikisource as a source text, rather than Wikibooks. -- Prince Kassad 16:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)- I agree, transwiki for those reasons. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I brought this over a while ago with the intent to make entries of the terms, but there really is no other good source for them, so they generally will not meet the CFI. This seems a shame to me, as their inability to qualify most likely stems from the characteristics of the community in which they were used. I have no objection to transwikiing the material to Wikisource, but I'd like to find some way that the dictionary aspects of it could be kept here, perhaps formatted into an appendix. bd2412 T 17:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- As I said, other languages that do not, or can never meet CFI have been allowed appendices, so this title is definitely wrong. I think the difference here, is that if it's a copy-and-paste from a public domain source, it might as well go directly to Wikisource. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I am not disagreeing with moving this to Wikisource, but can we also move/copy it into an appendix space here and format it in accordance with our comparable appendices? bd2412 T 18:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Why would the Chinook Jargon not meet CFI? It was a major language of the Pacific Northwest, and Google Books has at least two books in the language[1][2].--Prosfilaes 14:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- As I said, other languages that do not, or can never meet CFI have been allowed appendices, so this title is definitely wrong. I think the difference here, is that if it's a copy-and-paste from a public domain source, it might as well go directly to Wikisource. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Would this mean that Category:Chinook Jargon language with all its contents needs to be deleted? -- Prince Kassad 13:42, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- I brought this over a while ago with the intent to make entries of the terms, but there really is no other good source for them, so they generally will not meet the CFI. This seems a shame to me, as their inability to qualify most likely stems from the characteristics of the community in which they were used. I have no objection to transwikiing the material to Wikisource, but I'd like to find some way that the dictionary aspects of it could be kept here, perhaps formatted into an appendix. bd2412 T 17:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, transwiki for those reasons. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:49, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Chinook Jargon is a pidgin language based on multiple Native American languages.
- Yes, transwikied articles do not "move" to the 2nd wiki, they are "copied" (page history and all), so if it gets a transwiki it does not follow that we also have to delete it. Ergo keep and improve. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Archive a copy in wikisource, but keep an Appendix for our use, including use of the red links, possible attestation and inclusion of terms, and further development of the entries and vocabulary. If this is considered a reliable source on a dying or dead language, then it would be a crying shame to completely expunge its remnant of from the dictionary. —Michael Z. 2010-03-29 21:32 z
Kept. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)