Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turks and Caicos Islands dialect

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. Eastmain's source is sufficient to conclude the matter.

Please note that this is a non-admin closure. I do not believe the close is contentious in any way, but if you disagree, you may revert it for a sysop to close instead, or else bring the matter to DRV, as you please.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 21:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Turks and Caicos Islands dialect[edit]

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

Unreferenced and arbitrary stub list of originally researched phrases, spelt using a custom phonetic transcription. From the ten words included it appears to largely describe the Barbados accent. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 08:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While this article clearly needs work, I wouldn't support its wholesale Deletion. This is, after all, the sort of thing an encyclopedia is supposed to be about (as opposed to a compendium of pop culture). It needs Sourcing ASAP, and the 9,050 Google hits I got for "Turks and Caicos Islands dialect" should help someone find that info. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 10:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - it is a dialect that is the official language of these islands, so it should be inherently notable. It certainly needs a lot of work, but that's no reason for deletion. -Lilac Soul ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 14:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Real and verifiable linguistic dialect ~~that is the official language of a British Overseas Territory.~~ youngamerican (wtf?) 14:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The major problem here is that the article does not establish that there acutally is a distinct dialect for the islands in question. That can only be done by reference to reliable sources that discuss the topic. Do such sources exist? If not, then we should Delete. Blueboar (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. To the editors above who say that Turks and Caicos Islands dialect is the official language of the territory, do you have a source for that? According to our Turks and Caicos Islands article, as well as the CIA World Factbook, the official language there is English. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Delete - Current article is just fluff. Delete if no serious sourced content is added in the next few days, but No Prejudice to the article being recreated as a properly sourced article in the future. - BilCat (talk) 07:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as is but without prejudice to a sourced article being written about the dialect. Currently just a random list of words.-- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 21:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The subject is potentially notable, but notability has not been established and a few minutes search among likely sites didn't turn up anything. If someone does manage to find something of substance, they should first expand language section of T&C. If people manage to find enough reliably sourced material to make that section too large, then a separate article should be created.--SPhilbrick T 19:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:49, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There's an article in a scholarly book on the topic. See this book. -- Eastmain (talk) 21:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC) See also this search for more about Turks and Caicos English in the context of other Eastern Caribbean Englishes. -- Eastmain (talk) 21:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unsourced, and I have been to TCI, they speak perfectly normal English there Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC) I didn't see the source when I voted. That's seriously impressive. Grateful if a passing admin can now close this as keep. There can be no doubt about notabiluty or existance now. I can't do it myself because I already participated in the debate. Good work Eastmain. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:23, 22 August 2009 (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.