Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antifinnougric

Antifinnougric

This is a POV split off the main article Finno-Ugric language. The POV is also presented (in better encyclopedic language) in the main article. --Pjacobi 12:07, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Partisan rant, possibly original research. Rewrite the main article first; if the information becomes substantial enough to have its own article (which I doubt), split off into Criticism of the Finno-Ugric language group or somesuch. Current article is unacceptable in title and content. JRM 12:19, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
• Delete. There is already a section about this under the main article. Jeltz 15:01, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Also only one google hit for Antifinnougric and that is from the Wikipedia. -- Jniemenmaa 15:13, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. This is not original research. This article was a temporary expedient during an NPOV dispute on the Finno-Ugric language. The dispute now appears to have been resolved and all information from this article either has been or should be transferred (in a more NPOV form) to the Finno-Ugric languages article. -- Derek Ross | Talk 15:44, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
  • I see. It's good to know in which context this was created. My vote is obviously still delete. Jeltz 18:12, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: It's a rant. Geogre 16:56, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Even if the content were worth saving, no one will find it or link to it under this title. The points made are present already in the Finno-Ugric page. Smerdis of Tlön 19:52, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: The points are - sadly enough - present in the article on Finno-Ugric languages. A lot of the claims made by the person who put this are just wrong an can easily be proven to be so. --zeno 23:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete; POV and couldn't be more wrong. Even the most hyper-sceptical historical linguists accept so obvious a family as Finno-Ugric. - Mustafaa 01:34, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. POV preaching. Pretty ignorant: language families are usually grouped by common origin of vocabulary traced back through regular sound changes. — Gwalla | Talk 04:01, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, of course. POV story / not backed up by (academic) sources / bad story from a linguistic point of view. Even if it was a minority meaning that deserves being mentioned, it shouldn't have its own article. ¶ Mark Dingemanse (talk) 21:08, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, style and language inappropriate for an encyclopedia, not properly backed up; I also believe it is plainly wrong in its assertions but should still be mentionned elsewhere, as continuous efforts have been made by some scholars to try to relate hungarian to other language groupes. Alfy 04:46, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Antifinnugor is a troll and a charlatan. Pasquale 18:47, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. It contains information, no other page does and reveals some linguistic charlatanery of the past. Antifinnugor 19:34, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)