Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ceqli language
Ceqli language was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE
Created by the author (i.e. Rex F. May created the page and the conlang), seems out of the spirit of wikipedia. --202.147.117.39 03:55, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC) (Sorry, that anon is me. for some reason i keep being logged out. --Kesuari 03:56, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC))
- Delete. Exploding Boy 06:08, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep: It is reasonable that someone with an interest in invented languages should seek information about them in an encylopaedia, especially one unlimited by size. This particular invented language has been published and has attracted some wider interest such that it is not solely the plaything of its author. (Contribution from A.Rosta)
- If it's only been published on a geocities website, and only got interest from a few dozen conlang creators worldwide, it's not of sufficient significance. Unless someone can give a conference cite or some such, then I vote Delete. Oh, and Wikipedia is only unlimited in size if people help fund it. Average Earthman 11:17, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep: Why is it "out of the spirit of wikipedia"? Why is it "not of sufficient significance"? Would Loglan or Lojban be acceptable? Sona? Tok Pisin? Swampy Cree? -- Larry Sulky
- Tok Pisin is not a conlang, it's natural language spoken by people (primarily) in Papua New Guinea. Because it came about naturally, it's no different from articles about Russian, trees, or helium. Loglan/Lojban bring something to the table; these are important logical languages (whether logical languages are important is a different matter). As has been observed elsewhere, the article on Ceqli reads more like an ad than a wikipedia article. Also, should I create a Wikipedia article about Føtisk (a family of artlangs of mine)? --Kesuari 04:33, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- In English, I believe the term is "sockpuppet." "Swampy sockpuppet" works for me. Delete as non-notable. - Lucky 6.9 17:40, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. The language has perhaps only one really serious advocate, but there are a number of other people with interest in the project, and it's more significant than a lot of other things that do get into Wikipedia. - BRG 19:47, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. I think we need to define some kind of rough policy about this sort of thing. I don't think anyone should create an article in Wikipedia about eir own project, no matter how notable or potentially-notable it might be. To me, all such articles are vanity. Let the populace create articles about interensting things in the world, not interesting things in their world. Jeeves 22:28, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- The article's just an ad, and needs to be deleted. Regarding your other point, Jeeves:
- A project manager could always send other people to do his
spammingpromotion for him, and - I would openly invite the creators of large projects to write up articles for them — Larry Wall for Perl, for instance.
- A project manager could always send other people to do his
- The article's just an ad, and needs to be deleted. Regarding your other point, Jeeves:
- But other than that, I agree with your sentiment. I guess what matters the most is notoriety. --Ardonik 03:35, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
- You're quite right, excellent points. I guess I was speaking more in terms of heuristics — a person writing about eir own pet project (conlang, micronation, programming language, whatever) is in my book a huge strike against, and points to that person not understanding Wikipedia's stated goals. An interesting counter-point to what you said about inviting the creators of large projects to write about them (if I may play the devil's advocate for a moment) is that this would lend a possibly erroneous air of legitimacy to those writings (after all, the creator of a project necessarily has a significant bias) and possibly encourage the "this is MY page" approach which we strive to avoid. Something to think about, at any rate. Jeeves 06:26, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- If I had written the article, as one who had no proprietary interest in the language but just thought it of sufficient interest to write about, would you think differently? In fact, I asked Rex May to write it because I thought his article would be more accurate than anything I could write. If the only reason you want it deleted is because it was written by the author of the project, I would like you to reconsider. -- BRG 15:14, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Good point. However, that an article about a project might be written by that project's creator is certainly not the only reason I would suggest deletion, but it's a big "vanity" warning sign to me. I have several interesting projects myself that I choose not to write WP article on out of respect for that principle and the "notoriety" clause. Like I said, it's kind of like a heuristic, along the lines of
D = Vanity_Factor - Notoriety + VFD_Abuse, whereDis some unitless quantity I use to help decide whether I vote to delete. Or something like that. Trying to reduce our subjective tendencies towards/away from deletion is indeed fraught with complexity. Jeeves 02:18, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Good point. However, that an article about a project might be written by that project's creator is certainly not the only reason I would suggest deletion, but it's a big "vanity" warning sign to me. I have several interesting projects myself that I choose not to write WP article on out of respect for that principle and the "notoriety" clause. Like I said, it's kind of like a heuristic, along the lines of
- If I had written the article, as one who had no proprietary interest in the language but just thought it of sufficient interest to write about, would you think differently? In fact, I asked Rex May to write it because I thought his article would be more accurate than anything I could write. If the only reason you want it deleted is because it was written by the author of the project, I would like you to reconsider. -- BRG 15:14, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
- You're quite right, excellent points. I guess I was speaking more in terms of heuristics — a person writing about eir own pet project (conlang, micronation, programming language, whatever) is in my book a huge strike against, and points to that person not understanding Wikipedia's stated goals. An interesting counter-point to what you said about inviting the creators of large projects to write about them (if I may play the devil's advocate for a moment) is that this would lend a possibly erroneous air of legitimacy to those writings (after all, the creator of a project necessarily has a significant bias) and possibly encourage the "this is MY page" approach which we strive to avoid. Something to think about, at any rate. Jeeves 06:26, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- But other than that, I agree with your sentiment. I guess what matters the most is notoriety. --Ardonik 03:35, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: I would love to see a policy discussion opened on the subject of conlangs in general. In the absence of such, the spread of this one is not sufficient. Further, one assumes that those who know to look for the conlang know the name and know to search for it at its origin. Wikipedia does not need to be a platform for it, when the creator has already provided such and demand is not sufficient that strangers will be looking for it. Geogre 00:20, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. There is a real danger that Wikipedia could find itself getting large numbers of these unnotable things if we're not careful. We've already seen the Usenet posts saying "hey, if you want to publicise your conlang, go to Wikipedia". Let's not make things any worse. Ambivalenthysteria 01:43, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- We have dozens of articles about every darn ship in the US Navy. (see the links to "Midway Island")Do we need all them? If we can have that sort of stuff, which is of no interest to me or to most people, I think that having articles on every conlang that has a site on the Web is hardly worse. And in an encyclopedia with 2000,000+ articles, a few on these things hardly qualifies as excess bulk. Come on! -- BRG 15:20, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
- There is a big difference there - between one person's project, and a ship that many people served on, was involved in historical events, etc. I just did a project for psychology class - should that get an article too? Ambivalenthysteria 02:22, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- We have dozens of articles about every darn ship in the US Navy. (see the links to "Midway Island")Do we need all them? If we can have that sort of stuff, which is of no interest to me or to most people, I think that having articles on every conlang that has a site on the Web is hardly worse. And in an encyclopedia with 2000,000+ articles, a few on these things hardly qualifies as excess bulk. Come on! -- BRG 15:20, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. When Googling, in quite a number of pages I found it mentioned as an attempt to improve Loglan, see [1], [2], [3]. It's not obscure enough to delete, but it could perhaps better be integrated into an article on Artifical Languages (minor), or the like. Pjacobi 11:01, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I've done some Wikification on Ceqli, also I did some comparisons, with other auxlangs, namely Glosa language and Folkspraak. In comparison Ceqli isn't much more obscure, even the (low) number of members of their discussion lists (all use Yahoogroups), are comparable. Pjacobi 17:20, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- How about VFDing them all then, if they're also conlangs? Ambivalenthysteria 02:22, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Be bold and integrate them all into an article Artifical Languages (minor), if you find the multiple small articles disgusting. Pjacobi 11:42, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- How about VFDing them all then, if they're also conlangs? Ambivalenthysteria 02:22, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I've done some Wikification on Ceqli, also I did some comparisons, with other auxlangs, namely Glosa language and Folkspraak. In comparison Ceqli isn't much more obscure, even the (low) number of members of their discussion lists (all use Yahoogroups), are comparable. Pjacobi 17:20, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. The delete arguments strike me as being particularly weak. "Looks like an ad"? To whom? It didn't strike me that way. "Not enough space"? When Toki Pona, a language of little if any more interest, has its very own Wikipedia? "Nobody's interested"? Has someone done a survey, or does this simply mean "I'm not interested"? (Note: Googling "Ceqli" gives almost 700 results, so presumably more than "a few dozen conlang creators worldwide" are interested; but even if that were the limit of interest, wouldn't Ceqli deserve an article?) --24.7.81.204 16:52, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Time once again for Wikipedia's favorite game show, SPOT THE SOCKPUPPET! Here's your host, 24.7.81.204! - Lucky 6.9 16:57, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Blurp! Sorry, you lose. No Ken Jennings, you. 24.7.81.204 is I, Don Harlow [4], not a Wikipedian (though I contributed to one or two articles when this Wikipedia was somewhat younger) and not anyone else who has posted in this discussion. Interesting to discover, however, that sockpuppet has, at least in this venue, replaced the term dirty Commie, with which I grew up, as a way of attempting to silence, or at least invalidate the argument of, anybody who disagrees with you.--24.7.81.204 05:36, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- This vote certainly has brought them out, hasn't it? Ambivalenthysteria 02:22, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Time once again for Wikipedia's favorite game show, SPOT THE SOCKPUPPET! Here's your host, 24.7.81.204! - Lucky 6.9 16:57, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I suppose I'm one of the "few dozen conlang creators" who is interested - not that I've ever created a conlang. Ceqli seems to be a reasonably fleshed-out language, with a more complete vocabulary than most pet artlangs ever attain. What makes Ceqli less deserving of a Wikipedia entry than, say, Ithkuil or Europanto? (The entry rather does need to be rewritten, though.) RSpeer 04:02, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Uh, R...the fact that you posted this vote less than an hour after posting your very first article makes you a bit suspect. - Lucky 6.9 06:13, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- If new users aren't supposed to comment on votes for deletion, there should be something on one of the welcome pages saying so. Thanks for the warm welcome. Rob Speer
- You certainly are welcome. It's rare that a new user would post a vote on this page, especially about such an esoteric subject. When it happens, especially so soon after a first post, it's suspicious because people have taken the so-called "sockpuppet" route before. If your intentions were honest, especially since you're familiar with the subject at hand, please feel free to jump in the fracus. I really was trying to be gentle and to give you the benefit of the doubt. Sorry if it didn't come across that way. - Lucky 6.9 08:23, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Lucky 6.9 et.al. I hope you agree with my clarifying of the thread structure. Do you have technical evidence of sockpuppets at work? If at all, I'd assume that this is a case of calling friends and family for help, which is not the same as the use of multiple user names from one person. Also, don't bite the newbies, please! Pjacobi 11:40, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- You certainly are welcome. It's rare that a new user would post a vote on this page, especially about such an esoteric subject. When it happens, especially so soon after a first post, it's suspicious because people have taken the so-called "sockpuppet" route before. If your intentions were honest, especially since you're familiar with the subject at hand, please feel free to jump in the fracus. I really was trying to be gentle and to give you the benefit of the doubt. Sorry if it didn't come across that way. - Lucky 6.9 08:23, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- If new users aren't supposed to comment on votes for deletion, there should be something on one of the welcome pages saying so. Thanks for the warm welcome. Rob Speer
- Keep. I'm an auxlanger/conlanger who has been following the progress of Ceqli for a while. Ithkuil was mentioned above. Well, I hadn't heard of Ithkuil until reading this page today. Based on my experience, Ceqli if anything would be more deserving of a spot here than would Ithkuil. (Not to say that Ithkuil shouldn't have a page; they should both stay. Wikipedia informed me of Ithkuil today, and that's a good thing.) (Yep, I'm new here too. But I'm not quite so new in the Esperanto and Ido Wikipedias.) Ailanto 16:37, 2004 Jul 17 (UTC)
- Delete: vanity, advert, original research. Linguistic equivalent of a micronation. Wile E. Heresiarch 17:04, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Moderately important as conlangs go. (Which may not be much on the whole scheme of things but is sufficient for me.) -- pne 18:53, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I think that every language, even such a minor conlang has right to have a page about. Who cares about a small village tucked away somewhere in the USA? But there are articles about such places. Ceqli is a matter of interest for more people than many other things which has their articles here.Zbihniew 20:41, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Who speaks this language? Either verify that there is an actual and significant community of speakers, or I can't see how this is worth an encyclopedia article. Everyking 21:36, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- "Speakers"? You must be new to conlangs. If you're looking for constructed languages with a significant number of speakers, the only one you'll get is Esperanto. Yet Wikipedia already contains (and should, IMO) information on many other conlangs. Rob Speer 04:24, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)
- Conlangs are not unfamiliar to me, but I don't believe being a conlang should qualify a language for automatic inclusion. If it doesn't have a past or present community of speakers, it's simply not notable enough. We don't want non-notable people to have biographical articles, so why in the world should non-notable people get to have their made-up languages included? Feel free to nominate any other non-notable conlangs for deletion, too. Everyking 09:35, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- "Speakers"? You must be new to conlangs. If you're looking for constructed languages with a significant number of speakers, the only one you'll get is Esperanto. Yet Wikipedia already contains (and should, IMO) information on many other conlangs. Rob Speer 04:24, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I presume it's kosher for me, the original author of both ceqli and the article on ceqli to vote? Especially now that the article has indeed been rewritten (and much improved) by another. If you go read it now, you'll find it's a much better description of ceqli than mine was. Speakers? None yet — the language is still incomplete. But some translations have been done, and some e-mail communication has proven to work quite well.
- Ha! I'm flattered. I just followed the link to 'sockpuppet,' and I'm indeed flattered that anyone would think a technoklutz like me capable of figuring out how to disguise his posting to appear to be a different person! And, indeed, no family members have participated, and the other keep-voters are either unknown to me or are people I recognize from their participation in my ceqli discussion group or other language-oriented groups. And as for vanity, I'm well-known in other fields to far more people than this Wikipedia article will reach in the foreseeable future. If any other language-creator out there doesn't want to go through a Spanish Inquisition like this (even if he doesn't expect it), I'll be happy to write an article for his artificial language.
- Keep. Wikipedia has more-than-just-stub-sized articles on every smallest hamlet in the USA (about which hardly anyone but its own few inhabitants cares or has ever heard about), on every childish Pokémon monster with all its gory details (which only the most hardcore pokemaniacs will ever care to read), on every irrelevant US-navy ship (sorry, but only a handful of them have ever actually taken part in any historical event, the rest being of no real interest whatsoever to most people), on every forgettable Z-class American movie, etc., etc.; I don't see any good reason why we should delete an article about a conlang that most people interested in conlangs have heard of and may be interested in knowing a little more about. Also, there aren't many more conlangs that I know of which display a similar mix of logical, naturalistic and IAL characteristics or which attempt to fuse two such different languages as English and Chinese, so it's good in itself as an example of said kind of mixed-type conlang. Regarding someone's comment about the size of the Wikipedia depending on funding; sorry, but any mention of this article being detrimental to the Wikipedia is absolutely ridiculous: most (99.999999999...%) of the money invested goes to financing the bandwidth and serving capabilities, not at all memory space, which is rather cheap (why do you think Hotmail is now offering 250 MB for each of its millions of free accounts?), and besides, the whole current Wikipedia occupies only a laughable 16 GB (that's only 1/5 of my personal hard-disk capacity), of which the article on Ceqli eats up less than an absolutely negligible 1/6,750,000 fraction. In fact, many articles on Pokémon monsters or any image alone of one of them eats up around twice the 2,500 bytes of the article on Ceqli. Even this poll for deletion itself, which is about four times longer than the article itself under discussion, is eating up much more memory space. Uaxuctum 00:47, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Maximus Rex 01:38, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete vanity language. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:25, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete, vanity. Andris 08:41, Jul 19, 2004 (UTC)
- Again the pointless argument of vanity. Don't you really know who Rex F. May is? Haven't you ever heard of famous cartoonist 'Baloo', whose comic strips have been praised and published around the world? Check this: [5]. Rex won't get any more famous from "publicizing" Ceqli. He's already much more successful and famous in his work than what most of us will ever dream of being. In fact, Rex F. May is VIP enough to deserve a Wikipedia article about his own person. "Delete, vanity"... better get yourselves a bit informed and don't be ridiculous. Uaxuctum 14:34, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- As mentioned earlier it should be included on a page that describes conlans. If a particular language is then significant enough it can be branched from there, otherwise an external link can be provided to the author's site. [Unsigned, undated entry on VfD page, moved & refmtd by Jerzy(t) 02:39, 2004 Jul 20 (UTC)] - Oops that was me, new to the vfd pages so not used to signing things, Hackerjack (Talk)
- Del. Vanity. --Jerzy(t) 02:56, 2004 Jul 20 (UTC)
- Ceqli is not a vanity language, understand? I can repeat it again louder, but not clearer. Ceqli is designed as a proposal of international auxiliary language, not as a personal artlang, and its author won't gain any more popularity or fame from having an article about it on the Wikipedia than what he already is from his own merits as a worldwide renowned cartoonist. Why on earth should we keep individual articles on Pokémon monsters, but delete an individual article on a conlang that, I repeat, is not unknown among the conlang/auxlang community? Why don't you ask the articles on individual Pokémon monsters to be deleted and to include Pokémon monsters only on a page that describes the Pokémon videogame, and if a particular Pokémon is then significant enough it can be branched from there. In fact, if the article on Ceqli is deleted just because you guys are not interested in conlangs and think the issue of describing different conlangs not worth enough of Wikipedia, I'll then place the whole Pokémon project, with the only exception of the main article "Pokémon" and possibly that of "Pikachu", in this vote for deletion page, as I don't find having dozens of articles on all the gory details about a commercial product to be any more interesting or more deserving of a Wikipedia article than are individual conlangs well-known among conlangers. I'll also place on votes for deletion all the dozens of articles on individual US-army/navy/airforce pieces of equipment which have not taken part in concrete historical events, as well as all the hundreds of individual articles on irrelevant tiny US locations under 5,000 inhabitants, the many pages devoted to obscure hacker issues, etc., etc. (this vote for deletion page will then have an unusually huge load of work, as there are countless dozens and dozens and dozens and dozens of similar examples that I've already come across while browsing through the Wikipedia—today I came across the detailed article on a some 2,000-inhabitant utterly irrelevant Metroplex suburb, which includes an article-specific Texas map image devoted to showing the precise location of this utterly irrelevant suburb, an image which by itself alone is eating up around 6 times the memory space required to store the article on Ceqli). If you're going to delete articles on conlangs because they do not seem any interesting to you, then apply the same measure of relevance to all topics and delete also those articles that do not seem any interesting to me. The Wikipedia has no memory storage problem at all that it can't store a whole Conlang project just like the Pokémon project, with even detailed articles on dozens of conlangs that the conlanging community finds interesting, Ceqli being among those. There is a whole community interested in constructed languages (check out the very active CONLANG mailing list), just like there are communities interested in topics like Pokémon, US-navy ships, US small towns and suburbs, hacker slang, etc. Why on earth do you care so much if there is a Wikipedia article about a conlang that people intested in conlangs finds interesting, that you need to have it deleted so urgently? Will it really hurt you so much that those 2,511 bytes of information relevant to conlangers and auxlangers remain there? Uaxuctum 04:46, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. I wasn't even going to vote on this one until the flock of sockpuppets caught my eye. And as for the previous comment, I think anyone spamming VFD as proposed above as a protest would get banned pretty quickly. Postdlf 06:29, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Listen, sock puppet. You start spamming VfD and you'll get blocked faster than you can spell your newest sock puppet ID. RickK 06:31, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)
- Listen, you biassed anti-conlang people: I'm not a sockpuppet, nor in any way affiliated with Rex F. May, whom I only know from a few comment exchanges in conlang groups and mailing lists that took place around a year or more ago. And I have not proposed "spamming VFD", but using the same standard for deletion that you are arguing to delete this article: if the article on Ceqli deserves deletion, so do literally thousands of other articles whose presence in the Wikipedia is no more justified at all than the presence of an article on Ceqli. And if I got banned for proposing them for deletion as the fair apply-the-same-standard-for-deletion corolary to the deletion of the article on Ceqli, then that would prove the sheer bias against conlangs that this discussion is clearly showing to be so dominant here. Uaxuctum 06:41, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Listen, you: I'm not an anti-conlang person (I have my own and am subscribed and contribute to a number of conlang (artlang, primarily) mailing lists, though as a result, things like (I'm deeply shocked to discover -- if I understand correctly -- that it was placed on VfD by Tristan, a member of our own community! There's a slang expression that escapes my recollection, that means "to be a homophobic homosexual", a conlang analogue of which I am reminded of here.) and censorious eyes have been said about me). I was not aware of all the numerous other articles on minor conlangs, so I did not submit them. This deletion vote will no doubt cause a precedent, and if we decide to delete this article, we can go through the other conlangs and decide whether or not to delete them, too. (Oh, and BTW, until I knew what Ceqli is, I didn't know who Rex F. May was, nor what Baloo is. Not everyone has the same set of knowledge. (I came across Ceqli through one of the various lists of conlangs on the Internet.)) --Kesuari 02:41, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Sorry, I wasn't addressing you but those two who had just accused me of being a sockpuppet. Yes, if this article is deleted, we can go through other conlangs, but we can also go through many other similarly irrelevant topics so as to avoid double standards. Uaxuctum 16:32, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Listen, you: I'm not an anti-conlang person (I have my own and am subscribed and contribute to a number of conlang (artlang, primarily) mailing lists, though as a result, things like (I'm deeply shocked to discover -- if I understand correctly -- that it was placed on VfD by Tristan, a member of our own community! There's a slang expression that escapes my recollection, that means "to be a homophobic homosexual", a conlang analogue of which I am reminded of here.) and censorious eyes have been said about me). I was not aware of all the numerous other articles on minor conlangs, so I did not submit them. This deletion vote will no doubt cause a precedent, and if we decide to delete this article, we can go through the other conlangs and decide whether or not to delete them, too. (Oh, and BTW, until I knew what Ceqli is, I didn't know who Rex F. May was, nor what Baloo is. Not everyone has the same set of knowledge. (I came across Ceqli through one of the various lists of conlangs on the Internet.)) --Kesuari 02:41, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Listen, you biassed anti-conlang people: I'm not a sockpuppet, nor in any way affiliated with Rex F. May, whom I only know from a few comment exchanges in conlang groups and mailing lists that took place around a year or more ago. And I have not proposed "spamming VFD", but using the same standard for deletion that you are arguing to delete this article: if the article on Ceqli deserves deletion, so do literally thousands of other articles whose presence in the Wikipedia is no more justified at all than the presence of an article on Ceqli. And if I got banned for proposing them for deletion as the fair apply-the-same-standard-for-deletion corolary to the deletion of the article on Ceqli, then that would prove the sheer bias against conlangs that this discussion is clearly showing to be so dominant here. Uaxuctum 06:41, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Insignificant. Fails to show up in searches in linguistics journals. No search results from JSTOR or Lexis-Nexis. No evidence of significant speaker-base compared to other conlangs. Author of article is appealing on external sites for non-wikipedians to vote to keep the article - seems to indicate that he is acting in bad faith. --Imran 12:04, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- How about quoting these appeals? You make them sound quite sinister. And if wikipedians are some sort of exclusive club, I'm terribly sorry I horned in. -- Rex F. May
- Keep. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 18:10, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I know that I've had my personal apology already, but I will point out that "Listen, sock puppet..." is not a way to greet new users, regardless of what prompted them to start participating. You just got a bunch of new users who were interested in a certain topic, and you shoved them out the door. (Not by voting to delete the article -- I'm sure that some Ceqli users would keep participating in Wikipedia even if the article got deleted -- but by calling them names the moment they began participating.) I plan to keep participating regardless, but only by keeping in mind that the Salem Sock Puppet Trials here probably represent the worst of Wikipedia, not the standard mode of discourse. Rob Speer 19:17, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)
- Again, Rob has expressed it far better than I could have.
- Delete. Thousands of people, perhaps tens of thousands of people mess around with artificial languages, fictional universes, invented writing system and so forth. Sometimes a small group of people actually use one of these languages or writing systems of so forth. That kind of thing is great fun but not notable unless the results are noted by a large number of third parties. Publish a translation of Winnie the Poo in the language or something and if it actually sells, maybe the language is notable. Or host a conference of users and get over 200 people to attend. Otherwise, its just a slightly unusual cool hobby. Jallan 22:17, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- A huge number of wikipedia articles are just about "unusual cool hobbies" of some people. this is not an argument against keeping the article.Marcoscramer 16:13, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Somehow I don't see a flood of artifical language articles spoiling wikipedia a notable threat. --Lussmu 08:22, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. I conlang myself, and I do know what it's like. Ceqli doesn't look like it is well known enough to merit its own article. Maknas 14:27, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Firstly it's not vanity, but rather one of the modern conlangs that have attracted the greatest interest. Secondly, we all use the wikipedia to find information about things that we know nothing or little about, and that interest us. Just now I found out new things about Ceqli that I didn't know before by reading the article. And I'm sure there are thousands of people interested enough in this kind of thing who would find this article useful as well. Isn't that exactly what an encyclopedia aims at. Not everyone has to find each article interesting.Marcoscramer 16:13, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Yes, to those of you who say Ceqli isn't well-known enough or isn't significant enough for inclusion, I respect your opinions, even if I may disagree. To those who say 'sockpuppet' and 'vanity,' I recommend that you find out what you're talking about before you start name-calling. And, BTW, how long is this back-and-forth supposed to go on before a decision is made one way or the other?
- Anonymous comments are ignored. As are the votes of people who have no history of editing on Wikipedia. Discussions last 5 days. RickK 19:40, Jul 21, 2004 (UTC)
- Ignored by whom? Anyhow, that was me, Rex F. May. I forgot to sign it because, I guess, I'm not a member of your exclusive club, and I do mean exclusive. And I somehow knew your ilk would find a way to skew the voting. And the discussion has already lasted longer than that. How unprofessional — Rex F. May
- Anonymous comments are ignored. As are the votes of people who have no history of editing on Wikipedia. Discussions last 5 days. RickK 19:40, Jul 21, 2004 (UTC)
- Yes, to those of you who say Ceqli isn't well-known enough or isn't significant enough for inclusion, I respect your opinions, even if I may disagree. To those who say 'sockpuppet' and 'vanity,' I recommend that you find out what you're talking about before you start name-calling. And, BTW, how long is this back-and-forth supposed to go on before a decision is made one way or the other?
- Keep, for inclusionist reasons. -- till we ☼☽ | Talk 22:01, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. For a vanity page it's remarkably NPOV'ed. One reason that obscure bios and spammish articles are bad for wiki is that they don't integrate with the whole via wikilinks; this is not true of conlangs. Ceqli isn't super-notable, but not the least notable thing we have in here either. Bacchiad 23:40, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. The very fact that the author is the creator, that the author is the chief support for retaining it, that the author's friends are so obsessed about keeping this, and that he's raising the cry of "exclusionist" at the idea of taking his baby down, shows that this article is a case of VANITY for him. Someday different people, not as emotionally involved with the issue may write a new article about this. Aris Katsaris 03:58, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I resent being described as one of "the author's friends" who are "so obsessed about keeping this." I am not a friend of Rex May; I am a person interested in auxlangs who feels strongly that the perfect auxlang can only be devised if we have knowledge of all the attempts that have been made and are able to evaluate their strong and weak points. People who know me on the auxlang and conlang list might recognize that if anything I am biased toward a Novial-like language, and that Ceqli is pretty far from my own auxlang preferences. But I do think it is necessary to know about all these creations, and it is in this spirit that I have spoken out for this article's inclusion. -- BRG 14:38, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
- As a sidenote even my own name gets ten times as many Google finds as this language. Compare and contrast with Lojban that has about 100,000 finds. Aris Katsaris 04:31, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Just to clarify: Rex F. May hasn't voted either way yet, and his initial article has been edited by others. Also, your comment that "someday different people, not as emotionally involved with the issue may write a new article about this", as if the current article actually showed a trace of POV, vanity or emotional involvement, is clearly biassed and unjustified. OTOH, I myself am not a friend of him nor anything close; I'm not even a user or supporter of Ceqli, let alone being "obsessed" with keeping this. If I have made extensive argumentations (and based them upon the objective and verifiable presence of similarly irrelevant articles in the current Wikipedia), it's because I find that deleting this article while keeping others which I don't find any more relevant is simply an unfair and biassed policy. Whether minor articles such as this are actually kept or not I care little as long as the issue is treated consistently (e.g., would this article ever make it into the Britannica? I don't think the article on Ceqli would, but neither at all the articles on Pokémon monsters nor so many others) and not just upon the votes of one or two dozen people who happened to look at this VfD page within five days. And BTW, the insulting comment you've left on my personal page offers an eloquent portrait of what kind of individual you are. Vote whatever you want—I guffaw in your face if you actually thought I care anything: in fact, hereby I change my vote: Delete. But if you're going to justify your vote, do it with provable objective facts, not with biassed perceptions and attacks ad hominem. Uaxuctum 16:32, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Delete, we have erased Galatico [6], Sardino [7] and many other minor conlangs. No reason this one should be spared. - SimonP 05:04, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)
- The 5 days are up. There is NOT enough consensus to delete. And most of the people who voted to delete did so based on a false perception (namely, that Rex May posted it as a vanity effort; he did not, as I urged him to post it, and if I'd posted the article myself, most of what people have said against the article would be inapplicable.) So, SimonP, the article should stay according to the Wikipedia rules as I understand them. -- BRG 14:31, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
- My count, excluding dubious votes, puts the voting at 17 to 8 in favour of deletion, this is a strong majority but perhaps not consensus. It might thus be best to wait a few more days as two or three more votes could swing it either way. - SimonP 17:42, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
- I thought consensus was roughly 2/3 either way. 17 out of 25 total votes represents 68% in favor of deletion. To needlessly put it another way, that's more than a 2:1 ratio in favor of deletion. Postdlf 00:07, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- My count, excluding dubious votes, puts the voting at 17 to 8 in favour of deletion, this is a strong majority but perhaps not consensus. It might thus be best to wait a few more days as two or three more votes could swing it either way. - SimonP 17:42, Jul 23, 2004 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.