- 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. Per User:Warshy and User:Curbon7. Looking forward to seeing the stub expanded.
Thanks everyone for participating. Unhappy with this decision? If one wishes to renominate this article with another policy-based rationale, they are able to do so. I will defer to other administrators to review it. I will not re-review my decision. Happy holidays. Missvain (talk) 00:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Judaeo-Portuguese (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is (no longer) an article, but a dictionary definition. There apparently isn't even any proof that it even existed. BilCat (talk) 07:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- comment There are a large number of Jewish "languages" that are little more than a language written in Hebrew script and with a sprinkling of Hebrew words. Few of these are languages in a MI sense, but may still be of sociolinguistic interest.
- IMO this stub is not worth keeping as-is, but it is perhaps at least worth turning into a RD to preserve the page history.
- I see no evidence that JP was a distinct language. However, it might still deserve an article as a sociolinguistic register. One source is at JewishLanguages.org. A PhD thesis available online here.
- — kwami (talk) 07:49, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I shan't lose any sleep if this is deleted, but anyway, I've made a couple of edits to indicate why two apparently identical citations are actually different. Athel cb (talk) 13:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This is one of the branches of Judeo-Spanish. It did exist in two modes: a) written in Hebrew characters (there is a Ph.D. dissertation about this, as indicated above and on the page); b) written in Latin (Spanish/Portuguese) characters, where some 20% of the text are transliterared Hebrew words. As I said, it is more of a branch of Judeo-Spanish, which in itself also had old Castilian and Portuguese words mixed into its vocabulary. The difference between Judeo-Spanish and Judeo-Portuguese lays in the relative proportion of Spanish and Portuguese words (and the form of spelling of a particular word, which may be different in Spanish and Portuguese) used in a particular text. A classic text in Judeo-Spanish may have 60% of the words in Spanish, 20% of the words in Portuguese, and 20% of the words in Hebrew. A classic text of Judeo-Portuguese may have 50 or 60% of the words in Portuguese 30 or 20% of the words in Spanish, and 20% of the words in Hebrew. The Judeo-Portuguese variant was mostly used by the Portuguese Jews in Amsterdam during the Dutch Golden Age of the 17th century. warshy (¥¥) 16:40, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Google Scholar features hundreds of articles mentioning this language as both Judaeo-Portuguese and Judeo-Portuguese. In particular, this paper offers a very in-depth analysis of this language. And that is only one of many. Curbon7 (talk) 21:24, 15 December 2021 (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.