Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalusa (language)

:{{la|Kalusa (language)}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Kalusa (language)}})

Expired Prod. Prod reasoning, "Non-notable personal project with no references beyond the creator's and friends' personal pages and a message group". Perhaps wider consensus can determine notability. Hu12 (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions.

• Delete. It seems clear that this constructed language is a web based project that has not yet received any significant notice outside its circle of interest. Suggest redirect to Calusa, a Native American people who once lived in southern Florida. Unfortuntely, very little of their language survives. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
• Weak delete - if someone can rescue this through better sourcing, that would good, but I don't see how I can fix the problem. Bearian (talk) 18:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
• The article itself is interesting and well-written, but indeed, sourcing might be a problem. Just in case, I've transwikied it to http://conlang.wikia.com/wiki/Kalusa —IJzeren Jan _Uszkiełtu? 22:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
• I'm the original creator of the article. I argue for a Keep based on inherent notability of corpus driven conlangs if my vote counts. I would at least like to point out to future voters that though it is true that most of the citations are of people who were connected to the project, anybody within the conlang community who were interested enough to write about the project would also have been interested enough to join in. So it might be like arguing that Quantum electrodynamics should not be included because all of the references are to people who are involved with Quantum electrodynamics. But I understand that the argument is weak, I just hope that the AfD discussion will be thorough and conscientious. --Sbp (talk) 14:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• Your vote does count, but there's no way that individual conlang with a certain design principle is inherently notable. In fact, even corpus linguistics probably wouldn't qualify (although its notability has been thoroughly proven), and it's doubtful that even an article about "corpus-driven conlangs" would stand up to scrutiny. Also, this is very different from something about a well-known field of science. This is more like an amateur scientist who writes an article about his pet theory, then cites his home page, fringescience.com, and some forum posts.Hermione is a dude (talk) 22:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• Delete per above.Hermione is a dude (talk) 22:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
• Delete There is no notability outside of the community.Curb Chain (talk) 06:20, 21 June 2011 (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.