Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pha̍k-oa-chhi romanization

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. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pha̍k-oa-chhi romanization[edit]

[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 indication that this system actually exists outside this article. The equivalent article was deleted on zhwiki for this reason. MSG17 (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and China. MSG17 (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Pe̍h-ōe-jī, as all searches for the characters "白話字" direct me to sources regarding Pe̍h-ōe-jī. I've found this database from an old discussion about adding Pha̍k-oa-chhi romanization, but nothing else. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 00:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple romanization systems called "白話字" – see 白話字 for a partial list and zh:白話字 (消歧義) for others. "白話字" is a natural name for an orthography reform because it literally means "vernacular script". I don't think that's a good reason to redirect the name of one romanization system to a different one. I think the article should be deleted (not merged) unless sources can be found. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Llajwa (talk) 20:51, 25 January 2024 (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.