This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Pending deletion: block compress error. Joyous 16:08, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
Delete There is no evidence that this language exists. Google links to "Arsh" point not to a Goidelic language, but to a survival in Appalachia of Scots, which is certainly not "Neo-Gaelic". Evertype 11:44, 2005 Mar 7 (UTC)
Delete. Although it's likely that some form of Gaelic existed in Appalachia, there's no direct evidence for it, least of all for the Irish-Gaelic-Scots-Welsh-Cornish-German-English-African-French-Native American pidgin or creole described in this article. --Angr 12:54, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete unless references are provided. - Mustafaa 20:58, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable. Megan1967 06:44, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete Unverifiable, internally contradictory, strong suspicion of original research (if not outright neologism). Though would be a notable topic if it could be stood up. Alai 15:12, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Unverifiable, possible hoax or conlang backstory. — Gwalla | Talk 04:06, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete - David Gerard 11:18, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.