Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tig (Tigrinya 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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tig (Tigrinya language)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources establishing notability.
Fully original research.
Created by now blocked account.
Linguistically, tig is not a prefix in Tigrinya. Pathawi (talk) 18:00, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Africa, and Ethiopia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I hope a comment from the nominator is not inappropriate. This article was created to address a real source of confusion: The similarity between the names of the Tigre (ትግረ Təgrä) & Tigrinya/Tigrigna (ትግርኛ Təgrəñña) languages, & the Tigray Region (ትግራይ Təgray) of Ethiopia, as well as several other terms derived from these. Tigre & Tigrinya are spoken in adjacent regions of the Horn of Africa, & Tigray is one of the areas where Tigrinya is a majority language. It makes sense that people could find this confusing. I do not object to a Wikipedia page which clarifies the use of these historically related terms. I am solely proposing the deletion of this specific page, as it attempts to distinguish between these terms on the basis of a prefix which has no notable (or other) appearance in reliable sources. Notability is the primary criterion that I identify as reason for deletion. Notability always matters, but it particularly matters here because the content is misleading. Linguistically, Tig- is not a prefix, or any other non-arbitrary element in these terms. The common element between these words is the consonantal series ⎷TGR. The idea of the prefix Tig- is original research—or really original supposition. The meaning & origin of the tri-consonantal root ⎷TGR might have notable coverage in reliable sources, & might be a reasonable topic for a page. I mention in the nomination that the creator of the page is banned: This is not an adequate reason to delete the page, but it is the reason that I have initiated this process rather than started with a conversation with the page's creator. Pathawi (talk) 18:28, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt per the OP's rationale. There is no source in that article that supports the existence of its topic, and there is no source in the real world out there, either. As a sock concoction without non-cosmetic contributions by other editors, it is actually a clean case of
WP:G5 (it's pretty annoying when a PROD for made-up stuff like this is contested, but no further comment on that). –Austronesier (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Prod is for uncontroversial deletions. Bad stuff should be deleted through AfD or CSD so that it can't be easily restored or recreated. ~Kvng (talk) 13:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, according to the reasons given by Pathawi and Austronesier. I would also not support the creation of a page TGR, unless there is any notable use of this three-radical sequence covering all possible Tigr... languages in the literature. I don't think there is. LandLing 15:31, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I fully agree with not creating ⎷TGR without notable use in reliable sources. I just wanted to be clear in my initial comment that I was not opposed in theory to other possible pages distinguishing these terms (assuming all Wikipedia criteria for inclusion): That my objections here are specifically to tig. Pathawi (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.