Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese-ordered 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. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

=[[Chinese-ordered English]]=

:{{la|Chinese-ordered English}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chinese-ordered_English Stats])

:({{Find sources|Chinese-ordered English}})

Article not supported by any sources other than one primary source, with the sole other source cited being tangential and not mentioning the topic at all.

Neither [https://www.google.com/search?q=chinese-ordered+english&btnG=Search+Books&tbm=bks&tbo=1#q=chinese-ordered+english&safe=off&start=10&tbm=bks Google Books] nor [https://www.google.com/search?q=chinese-ordered+english&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers Google News] nor [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=chinese-ordered+english&btnG=&as_sdt=1,5&as_sdtp= Google Scholar] yield relevant information, and the only Google Web Search results are either this article itself, or directly citing this article as their sole source.

In light of these failures to find reliable sources, and since Request for Sources templates have been added to the article for more than two years with no result, I submit this article to AfD per Deletion Reason #6 and/or #7. M. Caecilius (talk) 19:35, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Comment perhaps you should bundle English-ordered Chinese and English-ordered Japanese, which are essentially the same. Ansh6 6 6 07:16, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom; possibly redirect to Chinglish or Chinese Pidgin English. Ansh6 6 6 07:16, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Delete. It's non-notable due to lack of independent and reliable secondary sources .--Cold Season (talk) 14:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

: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.