Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tokunoshima language
- 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 keep. Dennis - 2¢ 20:53, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Tokunoshima language
- Tokunoshima language (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is one of several language articles recently created by Nanshu that is a violation of WP:SYN and includes information that contradicts other articles on Wikipedia and bases much of its existence due to a separate listing in the Ethnologue and a single sentence entry in Oxford's linguistics dictionary that I cannot remember the exact title to. There was a large discussion at WT:LANG to effectively censure me for having the gall to contest Nanshu's proposed new articles, which throughout discussion did realize that amongst the various languages in question, Tokunoshima was one of several that had the weakest level of notability and discussions in reliable sources. Most sources consider the language spoken on Tokunoshima as a dialect of the central Amami language (another article Nanshu heavily edited to justify his new classification of these languages). There's little coverage of this as separate from anything, and not certainly an article that cites Japanese academic papers on this dialect (方言) that deserves a page dedicated to espousing Nanshu's research on the northern Ryukyuan languages and extensive discussion on the phonetics. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 13:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:58, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:58, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. Described as a language rather than dialect in International Encyclopedia of Linguistics by Oxford University Press, plenty of detailed coverage to be found in Google Scholar and Google Books in addition to those currently cited (see e.g. survey summarised in Takeshi Shibata (1999). Sociolinguistics in Japanese Contexts. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-014979-1.). Andreas JN466 19:30, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
- Do you know how much coverage it has in there? One sentence. That's not notability. Tokunoshima is a dialect of Amami. Not a language unto itself.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
- It's a paragraph, not a sentence, and the reason I mentioned it is that this authoritative reference work describes it as a language, not a dialect, and points out that it is mutually unintelligible with other Ryukyuan languages. You seem to be hung up on the question whether these are dialects or languages. As far as I can see, Western scholars tend to view them as languages, on linguistic criteria, and Japanese authors tend to describe them as dialects, based on political considerations (fostering national unity). To me, that question is entirely immaterial. What is clear is that this speech form, whether dialect or language, is a part of humanity's cultural heritage that has been and is being studied in great detail by Japanese and Western scholars. That makes it notable, and that's all this discussion is required to determine. Andreas JN466 09:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
- It's not a paragraph. It's like 2 or 3 sentences that are identical to every other minor Ryukyuan language listed in the IEL. And no, Western scholars do not universally refer to these as languages. Tokunoshima has barely any coverage, English or Japanese, that separates it as a language from the language of Amami-Oshima and Kikaijima.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 15:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
- It's a paragraph, not a sentence, and the reason I mentioned it is that this authoritative reference work describes it as a language, not a dialect, and points out that it is mutually unintelligible with other Ryukyuan languages. You seem to be hung up on the question whether these are dialects or languages. As far as I can see, Western scholars tend to view them as languages, on linguistic criteria, and Japanese authors tend to describe them as dialects, based on political considerations (fostering national unity). To me, that question is entirely immaterial. What is clear is that this speech form, whether dialect or language, is a part of humanity's cultural heritage that has been and is being studied in great detail by Japanese and Western scholars. That makes it notable, and that's all this discussion is required to determine. Andreas JN466 09:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
- Do you know how much coverage it has in there? One sentence. That's not notability. Tokunoshima is a dialect of Amami. Not a language unto itself.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. Whether Tokunoshima is a dialect (dialect of what, BTW?), language, language variery or whatever has nothing to do with the deletion discussion. It only affects the title of the article (i.e., possible renaming). As for notability, Ryulong refuses to face the reality. Fukushima Chitsuko alone has published numeous articles on Tokunoshima. --Nanshu (talk) 14:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Even if it is only a defined dialect, there is no reason why we canot have an article. DGG ( talk ) 04:01, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Keep per JN466. HOT WUK (talk) 16:11, 24 October 2014 (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.