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 speedy delete as A7 (web): Web content which doesn't indicate its importance or significance by 8 Orangemike. Non-admin closure. --Amalthea^Talk 02:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Engrish (website)[edit]

Doesn't seem to be a notable website. None of the sources gives more than a trivial mention. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with to pages of Wiki Engrish where happiness is found in belonging with great hurry. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Merge with Engrish Clubmarx (talk) 22:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:40, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... and most of the sources are blogs, in particular the one at the NY Times.
Delete. The website alone is A7 speediable since the article doesn't even assert notability of the page, and it clearly fails the notability guideline for websites, lacking the "historical significance" needed. The content that is sourced by reliable sources is marginal: "numerous scholars have devoted their studies to it" and "Japanese put English words onto almost anything that can have print on it". Hmm. Nothing to merge, as I see it. --Amalthea^Talk 23:54, 12 October 2008 (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.