Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crenglish

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. postdlf (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Crenglish[edit]

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

There are serious notability concerns. A search found only one paper mentioning the topic under this name – a passing mention in an article on reading education – plus one paper on the phenomenon using the Croatian term hrengleski. Note that until earlier this year the page also described a Creole-English blend, but since I could find no sources describing such a blend I removed that section. Cnilep (talk) 06:22, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. —Cnilep (talk) 06:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions. —Cnilep (talk) 06:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Basically a neologism with very limited use. GregorB (talk) 08:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and re-instate the Creole-English section. A quick Google check suggests to me that Creole-English is the more widely used meaning for this word - crenglish croatian: 84 hits - crenglish creole: 682 hits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RHaworth (talk • contribs) 10:01, 25 March 2011
- Note that 682 Google hits is on the same order of magnitude as "electric walrus" (238) or "stove vacuum" (604), the first two arbitrary two-word strings that popped into my mind. I don't take that as evidence of ubiquity, let alone notability or verifiability. Cnilep (talk) 03:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Both uses (Creole-English, Croation-English) are quite infrequent on Google, being visibly complemented by uses like "English [department], Craig Robert, [email protected]". As long as there is no meaningful research on language mixing (as Croation-English mixtures) or research on language varieties is hardly if ever related to the word in question (as is true of the considerable research on English creoles), there is little justification to have a lexicon article on it. G Purevdorj (talk) 11:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As it is, it looks like a promotion of random academic persons... there's simply no demonstration of a notable concept. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article could be used as a template for six thousand more, like Quenglish (Quechua+English), Nahglish (Nahuatl+English), Basclish (Basque+English), Klinglish (Klingon+English) .... —Tamfang (talk) 19:31, 25 March 2011 (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.