Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Conquest of the Italian Peninsula by the Carpatho - Danubians

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 merge to Nicolae Densuşianu. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Conquest of the Italian Peninsula by the Carpatho - Danubians[edit]

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

Appears to be some kind of fringe theory about the origin of Old Latin. Article is completely unreferenced, and I can't find any sources that prove that this theory even exists, no less that it is notable. SnottyWong ^comment 22:13, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: And the original was in such poor English that I had to discard almost all of it, not being able to be sure what was intended. That being said, being a fringe theory (which I agree it apparently is) does not necessarily mean that it is not a notable fringe theory. There is a link to Nicolae Densuşianu (who I gather is the progenitor of the theory) where it basically implies "Densuşianu's unlearned vaporings were dismissed out of hand by actual experts". However, there is also this: "Part of Densuşianu's thesis was adopted by several official historians during the late years of Nicolae Ceauşescu's communist regime, serving as inspiration for a new discourse, one autarkic and nationalist in tone", and that is referenced, albeit to an offline book in Romanian. So I am at a loss to say if there is the germ of a worthwhile article here, but I am inclined to say that there might be. Herostratus (talk) 23:06, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about you just provide some sources instead of writing a lengthy response. SnottyWong ^soliloquize 23:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmm.... I'm not sure how to answer that. Herostratus (talk) 15:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete entirely incomprehensible in its current condition, the title makes no sense with its limited text, and there's no evidence at all that this is a theory even remotely taken seriously by the fringe theorists, let alone the rest of us.Bali ultimate (talk) 01:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Dacian language#In Romanian culture which has more on this topic. I have added some citations as they seemed easy to find and explain the matter well. Colonel Warden (talk) 06:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, either into Dacian language#In Romanian culture or Protochronism. Wherever the Indo-European languages originated, I don't think there's much doubt that, at some time, they came into Italy from parts east, probably somewhere in the Balkans. Apparently the hypothesis that Rome was founded by Dacians, rather than Dacia being settled by Romans, is something of a big deal in Romanian nationalism. This may be a fringe theory; it is a notable fringe theory, but probably ought to be treated in a single article. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete two cites to a single scholar does not notability make. Mtiffany71 (talk) 23:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 05:09, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Nicolae Densuşianu if it's only his theory then no need for two articles giving the same material. I also don't see it being claimed that they "conquered" Italy, just settled there. Steve Dufour (talk) 14:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Nicolae Densuşianu, what is usable anyway, still not convinced of any kind of notability, even fringe. He iro 03:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Nicolae Densuşianu. Edward321 (talk) 13:31, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge what can be used to Nicolae Densuşianu, even if I'm not certain it warrants a mention even there.Aldux (talk) 00:59, 3 October 2010 (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.